Allowed

Mukul Mohan Mandal v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC18 Aug 2022APL/223/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court accepted the application to quash an FIR registered for matrimonial offences. Relying on the settlement reached by the parties in family court divorce proceedings, the High Court held that further prosecution would serve no purpose and allowed the quashing of the criminal case.

What did the court decide?

Quashing and setting aside First Information Report No. 1307 of 2021 filed against the applicant.

Mukul Mohan Mandal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

33-CRA-223-2022-C.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 223 OF 2022

¶3

Mukul Mohan Mandal … Applicant

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Maharashtra and another … Respondents

¶6

Mr. Sudhir Chaudhary for the Applicant. Smt. A.S.Pai, PP for the State. Ms. Kaynat Mirza for Respondent No.2.

¶7

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND N.R. BORKAR, JJ. DATED : 18 AUGUST 2022

¶8

P.C. :-

¶9

. The present Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is filed to quash the First Information Report No. 1307 of 2021 (hereinafter referred to as “FIR”, for short) dated 27 December 2021 registered at Virar Police Station against the Applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶10

The aforesaid crime came to be registered at the instance of Respondent No.2, who has alleged that she was subjected to mental and physical cruelty at the hands of Applicant-her husband.

¶11

Kanchan P Dhuri

¶12

1 / 4

¶13

33-CRA-223-2022-C.odt

¶14

The learned Counsel for the Applicant and the Respondent No.2 jointly submit that the parties have amicably settled the dispute. It is submitted that the parties have filed the consent terms in the petition filed for divorce before the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai It is submitted that no purpose would be served by keeping the prosecution alive, in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties. The learned Counsel for the parties submit that the present case is squarely covered by the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab¹ .

¶15

The Respondent No.2 has filed consent affidavit dated 10 May 2022. The Respondent No.2 has stated that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶16

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh (supra) has held :

¶17

“But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and 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 offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or the family

1 (2012) 10 SCC 303

Kanchan P Dhuri

2 / 4

33-CRA-223-2022-C.odt

¶22

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 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.”

¶23

We have examined the facts of the present case in the light of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh’s case. It appears that parties have filed consent terms in the Petition filed for divorce, before the Family Court at Bandra. The main reason for filing of the FIR appears to be matrimonial discord. The allegations are totally of personal in nature. In view of the settlement between the parties, Respondent No.2 is not going to support the prosecution case and therefore, possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. Nothing fruitful will therefore come out of the prosecution in question. Apart from it, if the FIR is not quashed, the settlement arrived at between the parties would be disrupted. Considering these facts and circumstances, the petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, the Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads thus:

¶24

Kanchan P Dhuri

¶25

3 / 4

¶26

33-CRA-223-2022-C.odt

¶27

“a) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the FIR in CR No.1307/2021 filed by the org. complainant and registered in Virar Police Station on 27/12/2021.”

¶28

The Criminal Application is disposed of.

¶29

( N.R. BORKAR, J. )

¶30

( NITIN JAMDAR, J. )

¶31

Digitally signed by KANCHAN KANCHAN PRASHANT PRASHANT DHURI DHURI Date: 2022.09.14 10:59:42 +0530

¶32

Kanchan P Dhuri

¶33

4 / 4

Mukul Mohan Mandal v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukul Mohan Mandal v. the State of Maharashtra 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

Renuka Santosh Chavan Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Suryankant Anand Mulik Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mahesh Narayan Nazare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Manjeet Singh Kalyan Singh Bagga and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Dayalal Shamji Patel and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rahul Rajan Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.