Allowed

Suraj Narayanrao Kanchi and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC21 Mar 2023APPLN/2055/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court Bench at Aurangabad allowed an application for quashment of an FIR and subsequent compromise case. The court quashed the case because the respondent-wife explicitly consented to the quashment despite pending allegations of settlement breach between separated parties.

What did the court decide?

Quashed and set aside F.I.R. no.188 of 2021 and R.C.C.No.392 of 2022 for offences punishable under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Suraj Narayanrao Kanchi and Others Vs the State of… — Maintenance and Alimony | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

1 2055.2022APPLN

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

973 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2055 OF 2022

¶4

SURAJ NARAYANRAO KANCHI AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

¶5

… Advocate for the applicants : Mr.S.S. Bora APP for the respondent – State : Mr. G.O. Wattamwar Advocate for respondent no.2 : Mr.Pravin N. Kalani

¶6

CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & M.M. SATHAYE, JJ. DATE : 21 MARCH 2023

¶7

PC :

¶8

Learned advocate for respondent no.2 tenders across the bar affidavit in reply. Same is taken on record.

¶9

The applicant no.1 is the husband and applicant nos.2 and 3 are the parents-in-law of respondent no.2, who are the accused in the crime registered at her instance being F.I.R. no.188 of 2021 with Kotwali Police Station, Dist. Parbhani and subsequent R.C.C. No.392 of 2022 pending on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Parbhani for the offences punishable under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

We have heard learned advocate for the applicants, learned APP and learned advocate for respondent no.2.

¶11

2 2055.2022APPLN

¶12

The parties unanimously submit that though there is some dispute still lingering between the couple regarding alleged breach of terms of the settlement, in paragraph no.10 of the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent no.2, she has expressly mentioned that reserving her right to take appropriate steps in respect of the alleged breach of the terms and conditions of the settlement, she is consenting for quashment of the crime and the criminal case.

¶13

Obviously, we cannot go into the allegations and counter allegations regarding the breach of the terms of settlement. Fact remains that respondent no.2 in spite of being highly educated, is consenting for quashment of the crime, which is based on the matrimonial discord. Her attempt to reserve her right and consent for quashment of the crime, is indeed fair enough.

¶14

We see no reason once the couple has separated by obtaining divorce by mutual consent and when respondent no.2 is expressly consenting for quashment, to escalate the dispute by allowing the prosecution to go on and when no public policy is being offended.

¶15

7. Application is allowed.

¶16

3 2055.2022APPLN

¶17

We quash and set aside F.I.R. no.188 of 2021 registered with Kotwali Police Station, Dist. Parbhani and subsequent R.C.C. No.392 of 2022 pending on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Parbhani, for the offences punishable under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

[ M.M. SATHAYE ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL ] JUDGE JUDGE

¶19

sga/

Suraj Narayanrao Kanchi and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Narayanrao Kanchi and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagwat Bhimrao Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sunil Surendra Kakkad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Ramesh Vishwanath Bawage and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Deepak Hukumchand Duggad and Another Vs Shri Sthanakwasi Jain Sangh Shrirampur through President and Others

Jamil Abbass Sayyed Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Machindra Bhanudas Najan and Others Vs Manu Kumar Srivastava the Secretary General Administration Department and Others