Allowed

Rakesh Chandrakant Gurav v. Manoj Dattaram Gurav and Anr.

Bombay HC25 Mar 2021APL/274/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Application filed for quashing FIR No. 221/2010 under IPC 326/34. The Court allowed the application since the parties had mutually settled the matrimonial dispute, making the continuation of criminal proceedings futile. Based on Giansingh, the Court held that such family disputes with civil flavour warrant quashing where conviction chances are bleak.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Application allowed; FIR No. 221/2010 and pending criminal proceedings under CC No. 2028/PW/2010 quashed and set aside; Applicant acquitted.

Rakesh Chandrakant Gurav Vs Manoj Dattaram Gurav and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

Digitally signed Laxmikant by Laxmikant G. Chandan G. Date: Chandan 2021.03.26 11:20:59 +0530

¶2

(12) cri.apl-274.20.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.274 OF 2020

¶5

Mr. Rakesh Chandrakant Gurav]
age :years, occ : 46 years]
Indian Inhabitant,]
C-304, Sai-Prerna Apartments,]
Laxmi Nagar, Nallasopara (E),]
Dist : Thane, State : Maharashtra ]….. Petitioner

¶6

versus

¶7

1]Mr. Manoj Dattaram Gurav]
age : 35 years, Occu : Pvt. Tutor]
Indian Inhabitant]
E-1/2/B/10, Sanjivani Apts]
Sector – 8, Nerul]
Navi Mumbai, Dist. Thane]…..Respondent/
State Maharashtra] First Informant.
]
2]The State of Maharashtra]
(At the instance of VB Nagar Police ]

¶8

Mr. Prashant Gurav for the Applicant.

¶9

Mr. Sameer Khedekar a/w Ms. Pratibha Pawar for Respondent No.1.
Mr. V B Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the Respondent No.2/State.
Respondent No.1 present in Court.

¶10

CORAM :S. S. SHINDE,
MANISH PITALE, JJ
DATE :25th MARCH 2021

¶11

ORAL JUDGMENT :- (PER S S SHINDE, J)

¶12

1Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard with the

¶13

consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶14

1 of 7

¶15

lgc

¶16

(12) cri.apl-274.20.odt

¶17

2The Applicant has filed this Criminal Application for the following

¶18

relief :-

¶19

(b) The C R No.221/2010 registered with VB Nagar
Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable
U/s. 326 r/w sec 34 of IPC and further proceedings
arising out of the said FIR and pending vide CC
No.2028/PW/2010 before Ld. 59th Metropolitan
Magistrate’s Court, at Kurla, Mumbai be quashed and
set aside and the Applicant be acquitted from the said
offence”

¶20

3The learned counsel appearing for the Applicant and the learned
counsel appearing for the 1st Respondent jointly submit that the parties have
mutually settled the dispute. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st
Respondent has tendered across the bar the affidavit on behalf of the 1st
Respondent. The same is taken on record and marked as “X” for identification.

¶21

4In paragraphs 2 to 10 of his affidavit the 1st Respondent has stated

¶22

thus :-

¶23

“2 I state and submit that the contents of the present Criminal Application in para no.1-24 are true and correct.

¶24

2 of 7

¶25

lgc

¶26

(12) cri.apl-274.20.odt

¶27

3 I state and submit that I patiently thought over the present settlement and accordingly I have took my decision with my own free wish and will and thereby I have shown my desire for compounding of the offences alleged by me against the Applicant.

¶28

4 I state and submit that there is matrimonial dispute between myself and my wife Mrs. Mugdha Manoj Gurav and since 12/10/10 we are staying separately and that FIR was lodged by me against my brother in law i.e. the Applicant viz. Mr. Rakesh Chandrakant Gurav who happens to be cousin brother of my wife nearly 10 years ago vide C R No.221/2010 at VB Nagar Police Station, Mumbai u/s. 326 r/w section 34 of IPC.

¶29

5 I state and submit that since last more than 10 years we are dispute and our personal live are disturbed and have realized that we have wasted precious 10 years of our life. Hence with the intervention of respectable members from our community we have mutually decided to settle the matter where in apart from Dissolution of my marriage with Applicant’s sister and monetary compensation, there involves quashing of FIR against the applicant herein above and proceedings arising from it.

¶30

6 I hereby agreed to withdraw all the allegations in the present C.R.No.221/2010 registered with VB Nagar Police Station, Mumbai and also agreed to withdraw all the allegations against the Applicant made in the said FIR.

¶31

3 of 7

¶32

lgc

¶33

(12) cri.apl-274.20.odt

¶34

7 I state and submit as both the parties have shown their consent for the withdrawal of the FIR and further proceeding arising out of CR No.221/2010 registered with VB Nagar Police Station, Mumbai and hence in the interest of justice the FIR No.221/2010 and further proceeding arising out of said FIR required to be quashed against the present Applicant.

¶35

8 I state and submit that I am read to take back all the allegations made in the CR No.221/2010 registered with VB Nagar Police Station, Mumbai and hence the continuation of the proceeding in the said FIR will be futile effort and hence liable to be quashed.

¶36

9 I state and submit that the continuation of the present case against the present applicant will serve no purpose and hence liable to be quashed.

¶37

10 I state and submit that the offences alleged against the present applicant are personal in nature and in the interest of future of all concerned I am hereby giving my free consent for compounding of the case.”

¶38

5The 1st Respondent is present before this Court. When we
interacted with him, he stated that it is his voluntary act to enter into the
settlement and to give consent for quashing the impugned C R No.221/2010
registered with VB Nagar Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable

¶39

4 of 7

¶40

lgc

¶41

(12) cri.apl-274.20.odt

¶42

U/s. 326 r/w sec 34 of IPC and further proceedings arising out of the said FIR
and pending vide CC No.2028/PW/2010 before Ld. 59th Metropolitan
Magistrate’s Court, at Kurla, Mumbai. He further stated that already the
proceedings for dissolution of marriage are initiated before the learned Civil
Judge Senior Division, Vasai.

¶43

6Since the parties have amicably settled the dispute and, the 1st
Respondent has joined the prayer of the Applicant for quashing the impugned
C R No.221/2010 and further proceedings vide CC No.2028/PW/2010, no
fruitful purpose will be served in continuing the further investigation in
impugned C R No.221/2010 registered with VB Nagar Police Station, Mumbai
for the offences punishable U/s. 326 r/w sec 34 of IPC and further proceedings
arising out of the said FIR and pending vide CC No.2028/PW/2010 before Ld.
59th Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, at Kurla, Mumbai

¶44

7In so far as offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code is
concerned, upon careful perusal of the contents of the FIR so also the
accompaniments of the charge-sheet, the said offence is no disclosed, no sharp
weapon is used to assault the 1st Respondent.

¶45

8The Supreme Court in the case ofGiansingh v. State of Punjab
and Another1 has held that, the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and

¶46

1 2012 (10) SCC 303

¶47

5 of 7

¶48

lgc

¶49

(12) cri.apl-274.20.odt

¶50

predominatingly civil flavour stand on a different footing for the purposes of
quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial,
mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offence arising out
of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is
basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolves their entire
dispute. In this category of cases, the High Court may quash the criminal
proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and
the victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of
the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and
extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case
despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. It is
further held that, as inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory
limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in
such power viz.: (I) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the
process of any court.

¶51

9In the light of discussion in foregoing paragraphs, it is abundantly
clear that the Respondent No. 1 is not going to support the allegations made in
impugned FIR. Since the Respondent No.1 has joined the prayer of the
Applicant for quashing the impugned FIR and the proceedings being CC
No.2028/PW/2010, the chances of the conviction of the Applicant would be
remote and bleak. In that view of the matter, the Criminal Application deserves

¶52

6 of 7

¶53

lgc

¶54

(12) cri.apl-274.20.odt

¶55

to be allowed. Accordingly, the Criminal Application is allowed in terms of
prayer clause (b) which reads thus :-

¶56

(b) The C R No.221/2010 registered with VB Nagar Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable U/s. 326 r/w sec 34 of IPC and further proceedings arising out of the said FIR and pending vide CC No.2028/PW/2010 before Ld. 59^th Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, at Kurla, Mumbai be quashed and set aside and the Applicant be acquitted from the said offence”

¶57

10Rule is made absolute to the above extent and, the Criminal
Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶58

11The parties shall strictly abide by the consent terms and attend
each and every date fixed by the concerned Court wherein the proceedings are
instituted for dissolution of marriage. The parties shall extend full cooperation
for early disposal of the said proceedings for dissolution of marriage.

¶59

[MANISH PITALE, J][S. S. SHINDE , J]

¶60

7 of 7

¶61

lgc

Rakesh Chandrakant Gurav v. Manoj Dattaram Gurav and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Chandrakant Gurav v. Manoj Dattaram Gurav and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gajanan Jaywant Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Umesh Uday Bhuvad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sarfaraz Tajammul Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ayaz Ahmed Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shabir Abdul Rehman Shaikh and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Moulali Gafur Faras Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.