Allowed

Azaz Khalik Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC18 Apr 2023APL/345/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC, the applicant-husband sought quashing of a chargesheet under Sections 498A IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act. The court granted leave to amend the prayer clause and allowed the application based on an amicable settlement and the wife's explicit consent to quash the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Leave to amend to incorporate challenge to chargesheet in prayer clause is granted. The Criminal Application for quashing the chargesheet is allowed.

Azaz Khalik Shaikh Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

 4-Apl-345-2023.odt

¶2

Osk

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 345 OF 2023

¶6

Azaz Khalik Shaikh
V/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

¶8

… Applicant

¶9

… Respondents

¶10

Mr.Mateen Shaikh a/w. Mr.Muskan Shaikh, Mr.Zeeshan Khan & Mr.Arshad Shaikh
for Applicant.

¶11

Mr.Ajay Patil, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr.Nitin S. Borkar for Respondent No.2.

¶12

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ.

¶13

DATE : 18th April 2023.

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

1.Leave to amend to incorporate challenge to the chargesheet in the
prayer clause is granted.

¶16

2.Amendment be carried out forthwith and in any event during the
course of the day.

¶17

3.Applicant-husband has filed present Application for quashing of
Chargesheet No. 133 of 2023 pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Thane, arising out of CR No. I-980 of 2022 registered with Mumbra Police
Station, Thane, under Sections 323, 498A, 504 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4
of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, by consent of Respondent No.2-wife.

¶18

1/2

¶19

Osk 4-Apl-345-2023.odt

¶20

4.Learned Advocate for Applicant submitted that, the Applicant and
Respondent No.2 have settled the matter amicably and have executed ‘Consent
Terms’ dated 18th April 2023. That, in para No.4 of the Consent Terms, the
Respondent No.2 has agreed to give her consent for quashment of the said crime.

¶21

The Respondent No.2 has also filed an Affidavit dated 18th April 2023
duly affirmed before a Notary Public. Her signature has been identified by
Advocate Mr.Nitin S. Borkar. In para No.6 thereof, the Respondent No.2 has given
her ‘no objection’ for quashing the said CR No. 980 of 2022 registered with
Mumbra Police Station, District Thane. Learned Advocate appearing for
Respondent No.2 conceded the fact of affirmation of Affidavit dated 18th April
2023 and execution of Consent Terms dated 18th April 2023 by the Respondent
No.2. He submitted that, the Respondent No.2 has no objection in quashing the
said CR No. 980 of 2022.

¶22

5.In view of above, Application is allowed in terms of prayer Clause (a).

¶23

[ PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. ] [ A.S. GADKARI, J. ]

¶24

Digitally signed by OMKAR OMKAR SHIVAHAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN KUMBHAKARN Date: 2023.04.20 14:33:09 +0530

¶25

2/2

Azaz Khalik Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azaz Khalik Shaikh v. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prashant Jeevan Patil Vs Senior Police Inspector Karveer Police Station Kolhapur and Anr.

Gaurav Vijay Shinde and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Gaurav Vijay Shinde and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mukta Dabholkar and Anr. Vs the Central Bureau of Investigation (Cbi) and Ors.

Mukta Dabholkar and Anr. Vs the Central Bureau of Investigation (Cbi) and Ors.

Sunita Rakesh Tiwari @ Ms. Sunita Shrikant Mishra Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.