Allowed

Claudius S/O. Benedict Louis v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps City Kotwali, Amravati, Dist. Amravati and Another.

Bombay HC5 Oct 2023APL/834/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Nagpur Bench quashed an FIR alleging offences under Sections 326, 498-A, 294, and 506(2) IPC. Despite an injury certificate showing grievous hurt, the court exercised inherent powers to quash proceedings due to a full settlement, reconciliation, and the presence of minor children. The informant voluntarily withdrew objection, and the couple resumed living together.

What did the court decide?

The FIR relating to Crime No.0186/2023 registered for offences punishable under Sections 326, 498-A, 294 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code was quashed.

Claudius S/O. Benedict Louis Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps… — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

2023:BHC-NAG:14699-DB

¶2

1 1-J-APL-834-23.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 834 OF 2023

¶5

APPLICANT :Claudius S/o Benedict Louis,
Age 46 years, Occ : Service,
R/o Bishop House, Camp Road,
Near Dnyanmata School, Amravati,
Tq. and District : Amravati.

¶6

V E R S U S

¶7

NON-APPLICANTS :1. State of Maharashtra

¶8

 Through Police Station Officer,
 Police Station City Kotwali,
 Amravati, District Amravati.

¶9

2. Christina w/o Claudius Louis,
 Age 40 years, Occ : Service,
 C/o Tony Amair, R/o. Sindhi
 Camp, Akola 444004.

¶10

Shri S. B. Gandhe, Advocate for applicant.

¶11

Shri M. J. Khan, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.
Shri Tejas S. Kene, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶12

CORAM:-VINAY JOSHI AND

¶13

VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.
DATED : 05/10/2023.

¶14

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER VINAY JOSHI, J.) :

¶15

1.Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned

¶16

counsel appearing for the parties.

¶17

2.This is an application seeking to quash FIR relating to
Crime No.0186/2023 registered for the offences punishable under

¶18

Sections 326, 498-A, 294 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code on

¶19

account of settlement.

¶20

2 1-J-APL-834-23.doc

¶21

3.Informant lady is wife of applicant. The couple got
married in the year 2006 having two children from wedlock. There
were matrimonial differences in between the couple. The
informant perceived harassment at the instance of monetary
demand. She was also physically assaulted, therefore, she has
lodged a report.

¶22

4.During pendency of investigation, with the intervention
of both the families, matter was amicably settled. Both have
decided to patch up the differences and live together. It is
informed that from 01/07/2023, they are living under one roof
with their children. The informant has filed reply affidavit stating
about the settlement and her non-inclination to prosecute the
criminal case. She has also sworn an affidavit to that effect.
Informant lady is present before us, who is identified by her
counsel Shri Tejas Kene. On query, she has accepted about the
settlement and her no objection to quash the criminal proceedings.

¶23

5.Learned APP though not resisted, attracted our
attention to the Injury Certificate showing that the informant lady
sustained fracture at her left hand attracting the offence
punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. We have
considered the entire material. True, it is a case of causing

¶24

3 1-J-APL-834-23.doc

¶25

grievous hurt with dangerous weapon. However, we cannot
overlook the future of the couple, as they have patched up the
differences and living together. The informant is not inclined to
proceed with the prosecution, which is essentially against her
husband with whom she is living. Obviously, continuation of
prosecution would be at her own detriment and more particularly,
at the cost of future of two minor kids. Having regard to the
peculiar facts, we are of the considered view that in order to
secure the ends of justice, it is necessary to invoke our inherent
powers.

¶26

6.In view of above, application is allowed. We hereby
quash and set the FIR relating to Crime No.0186/2023 registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 326, 498-A, 294 and
506(2) of the Indian Penal Code on account of settlement.

¶27

7. The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶28

[VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J.] [VINAY JOSHI, J.]

¶29

Choulwar

Claudius S/O. Benedict Louis v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps City Kotwali, Amravati, Dist. Amravati and Another.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Claudius S/O. Benedict Louis v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps City Kotwali, Amravati, Dist. Amravati and Another.

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

Dinesh S/O Laxman Dakhane Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso Ps Sawani (Meghe), Dist. Wardha and Another

Sanjay S/O. Shivlal Shipne Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso Washim (Rural) Ps, Dist. Washim and Another

Shekhar S/O. Laxman Dhakate Vs State of Mah. Thr. Its Pso, Ps, Yashodhara Nagar, Nagpur Dist. Nagpur and Another

Mansoor Anfal Mani S/O Mohammad Ameen Mani (Husband of R 2 )and Others Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso Kapil Nagar Ps, Nagpur and (Wife of Applicant NO.1) Another.

Ashish S/O Anilkumar Mule Vs State of Mha. Thr. Pso Ps Gadge Nagar Amravati Tah. and Dist.Amravati and Another

Jumma @ Munna Burhan Hiriwale Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secretary Home Dep. (Special), Mantralaya Mumbai and 2 Others