Allowed

Rajesh Tripathi and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Apr 2023WP/1230/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Criminal Writ Petition sought to quash criminal proceedings under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, and 406 of the IPC registered at Vasai. The High Court, noting mutual settlement, filing of divorce by mutual consent, and the female respondent's affidavit of no objection, allowed the petition to quash the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Writ Petition for quashing of CR No. I-255 of 2009 and related proceedings is allowed.

Rajesh Tripathi and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Bombay HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Osk

¶2

 50-S-Wp-1230-2023.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1230 OF 2023

¶6

Rajesh Tripathi & Ors.
V/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶8

… Petitioners

¶9

… Respondents

¶10

Mr.Sandeep Mishra i/b.Mr.Baliram N. Pandey for Petitioners.
Ms.M.M. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State.
Mr.Ankit Pandey for Respondent No.3.

¶11

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

¶12

DATE : 6th April 2023.

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

1. Petitioners i.e. husband (Petitioner No.3), father-in-law (Petitioner

¶15

No.1), mother-in-law (Petitioner No.2), sisters-in-law (Petitioner Nos.4, 5 &

¶16

7), brother-in-law (Petitioner No.6), cousin mother-in-law (Petitioner No.8)
and friend of husband (Petitioner No.9) have prayed for quashing of CR No.
I-255 of 2009 pending on the file of learned Civil Judge (J.D.) and Judicial
Magistrate First class, Vasai arising out of CR No. I - 255 of 2009 registered

¶17

with Virar Police Station, District Palghar, under Section 498A, 323, 504,
506, 406 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, by consent of Respondent No.3.

¶18

2. Learned Advocate for Respondent No.3 submitted that, the Respondent

¶19

No.3 and Petitioners herein have resolved the dispute and differences

¶20

This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 13/04/2023. 1/2

¶21

Osk 50-S-Wp-1230-2023.odt

¶22

amicably. That the Petitioner No.3 and Respondent No.3 have filed divorce
Petition by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act
before the Civil Judge (S.D.), Vasai, District Palghar, bearing Marriage
Petition No. 302 of 2022. That the Respondent No.3 has given her ‘no
objection’ for quashing the present criminal proceedings in the said Petition.
He submitted that, the Respondent No.3 has filed an Affidavit dated 3rd April
2023, which is duly affirmed before a Notary Public. He tendered across the
bar said Affidavit dated 3rd April 2023. The same is taken on record.

¶23

3. In para Nos.4 & 6 of the said Affidavit, the Respondent No.3 has given her no objection for quashing the present proceedings. The Respondent No.3 is personally present in the Court and reiterates affirming of the said Affidavit dated 3^rd April 2023 and her no objection for quashing of R.C.C. No. 210 of 2010 arising out of CR No. I-255 of 2009.

¶24

4. In view of above, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer Clause (a).

¶25

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

¶26

Digitally signed by OMKAR OMKAR SHIVAHAR SHIVAHAR KUMBHAKARN KUMBHAKARN Date: 2023.04.20 13:54:52 +0530

¶27

This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 13/04/2023. 2/2

Rajesh Tripathi and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Tripathi and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

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

Monalisa Deshpande Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Umar Farooq Kadri Syed Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sudhakar Bhandare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pratik Narayan Vengurlekar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Akshay Suresh Karande and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shoeb Aslam Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.