The High Court granted a writ petition to quash criminal proceedings under sections 384 and 500 IPC. The respondent acknowledged a personal dispute settlement via affidavit, deeming further prosecution pointless.
The petition was allowed and the prosecution set aside subject to the petitioner depositing Rs.10,000/- as costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
24-CRIWP1607-2021.DOC
Santosh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1607 OF 2021
Priyanka Chandrakant Kharat Aged 32 years, Occu. Service Residing at Ganesh Chawl, Near Pipe line Bhim Nagar, Vartak Nagar, Thane (W), Maharashtra – 400 608
...Petitioner
Versus
…Respondents
Mr. Anand V. Upadhyay, for the Petitioner. Mr. Vinod K. Singh, for Respondent no.2. Mr. Daya @ Dayanand Vasant Gaikwad, Respondent no.2 present through V.C. and interacted. Mrs. M. H. Mhatre, APP for the State/Respondent no.1.
CORAM: S. S. SHINDE & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ DATED: 29th JULY, 2021 (Through V.C.)
ORAL JUDGMENT:PER : N. J. JAMADAR, J.
consent of the Counsels for the parties, heard fnally.
Criminal Case No.576 of 2019, pending on the fle of the learned
1/5
24-CRIWP1607-2021.DOC
Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 1st Court, Kalyan, arising out of FIR No.180 of 2019, registered at Khadakpada Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 384 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code (“the Penal Code”), at the instance of respondent no.2 Daya @ Dayanand Vasant Gaikwad – the frst informant.
5. Paragraphs 3 to 7 of the affdavit read as under:
“3 . I say that I have settled the matter amicably with the petitioner and I do not want to proceed against the petitioner in the said case. I say that matter before the trial court is in initial stage and it may take substantial amount of time for disposal of the matter.
2/5
24-CRIWP1607-2021.DOC
4 . I say that the petitioner has got married and prolonging of matter may affect the life of the petitioner.
5 . I say that in the light of the aforementioned circumstances, I do not have any objection if the FIR and chargesheet which is the subject matter of the present petition is quashed.
6 . I say that aforementioned contents are made by me on my own free will and consent.
7 . I say that I have no objection and I shall be highly greatful if this Hon’ble Court pleased to set aside the FIR No.180/2019 u/s 384, 500 IPC datd 03/05/2019 against the petitioner with Khadakpada Police Station, Kalyan and the chargesheet pending before Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class, 1st Court at Kalyan bearing Case No.R.C.C. No.576/2019.”
judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs.
3/5
24-CRIWP1607-2021.DOC
State of Punjab and another1 , wherein the Supreme Court has
observed as under;
“ 61 ……… the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil favour stand on a different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, fnancial, 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 resolved 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.”
apply with equal force to the facts of the instant case. Thus, we are persuaded to quash the prosecution in order to secure the ends of justice and prevent the abuse of the process of the Court.
1 2012 (10) SCC 303
4/5
24-CRIWP1607-2021.DOC
: ORDER :
The petition stands allowed in terms of prayer Clause (a), subject to deposit of costs of Rs.10,000/- by the petitioner, in the below mentioned account of the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa Covid-19, within a period of one week.
Bank Namde : Bank of India. Branch Name : Main Branch, Fort, Mumbai. A/c. Name : “Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa Covid-19” A/c. No. : 000110110013597 IFSC Code : BKID0000001.
Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms.
[N. J. JAMADAR, J.] [S. S. SHINDE, J.]
5/5
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings are to be quashed where the parties have amicably settled the personal dispute arising under IO 384 and 500 IPC.
Whether the continued prosecution would serve any fruitful purpose causing prejudice to the parties.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and anotherApplied¶39
Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Priyanka Chandrakant Kharat
The State of Maharashtra
Daya @ Dayanad Vasant Gaikwad
S. S. Shinde
N. J. Jamadar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
