Criminal Application seeking quashment of FIR and subsequent court proceedings for matrimonial offences allowed after finding that parties had amicably settled disputes and the applicant agreed to pay settlement amounts.
FIR C.R. No. I-145/2018 and Case No. 732/PW/2021 were quashed and proceedings disposed of.
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.
33 apl 70.2019.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 70 OF 2019
Abhijeet J. Hande ….Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and anr. ….Respondents
Mr. Anurag Ghag, advocate for the applicant. Ms. M. H. Mhatre, APP for the State. Mr. Ashish Dubey, advocate for the respondent No.2.
CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & SURENDRA P. TAVADE, JJ.
DATE : 18th FEBRUARY, 2022.
P.C. :
Digitally signed by SHUBHADA 1/4 SHUBHADA SHANKAR SHANKAR KADAM KADAM Date: 2022.02.26 11:32:22 +0530
33 apl 70.2019.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
“6. That both the parties have mutually agreed
upon the settlement amount of Rs. 1,50,000/-which shall be paid by applicant to the Respondent No. 2 in the following manner-
B. Rs. 50,000/- on the 2nd date of divorce application.
C. All gold ornament will be handover to the Respondent No. 2 at the time of quashing of FIR application.
D. Rs. 50,000/- at the final order in the divorce application.”
2/4
33 apl 70.2019.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
In clause 8 of the consent terms it is stated as under :
“8. That above terms both parties have decided to amicably settle all their disputes and to take divorce. It is also decided that the parties will not file any future complaints against each other and families. “
view that no purpose would be served by keeping the FIR and criminal proceedings pending except burdening the Criminal Courts which are already overburdened. Considering these facts, we are of the opinion learned counsel for the applicant has made out case for allowing the
3/4
33 apl 70.2019.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
application. The application is accordingly, allowed in terms of prayer clauses (c) and (f) which reads thus:
“(c) That the FIR registered by the Mulund Police
Station against the applicant being C.R.No.I-145/2018 be quashed and set-aside.
(f) Record and Proceedigns in Police Case No.732/PW/2021 from the files of the ld. Metropolitan Magistrate’s 27th Court, Mulund be called for and this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash entire proceedings.
The application stands disposed of accordingly.
( SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings involving matrimonial offences should be quashed when the parties have amicably settled their disputes.
Whether the consent terms filed by the parties support the unconditional withdrawal of allegations against the applicant.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S. Joshi versus State of HaryanaReferred¶27
B.S.Joshi versus State of Haryana AIR 2003 SC 1386 · Who else cites this
6 provisions across 2 enactments
Abhijeet J. Hande
The State of Maharashtra
Respondent No. 2
Prashna B. Varale
Surendra P. Tade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
