Allowed

Mohd. Asif Shamim Ahmed Ansari and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC8 Aug 2024APL/939/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay quashed a criminal complaint registered under Section 498(A) IPC. TheApplication was filed by husband, father-in-law, brother-in-law, and sister-in-law. The complainant filed an affidavit affirming settlement, cohabitation, and withdrawal of grievances, consenting to the quashing of the case.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Application allowing quashing of C.R. No. 0342 of 2024 registered under Section 498(A) IPC.

Mohd. Asif Shamim Ahmed Ansari and Ors… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

RVC 34 Apl-939-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 939 OF 2024

¶5

Mohd. Asif Shamim Ahmed Ansari

¶6

Shamim Ahmed Mohammed Shafique Ansari

¶7

Mohammad Khalid Shamim Ahmed Ansari

¶8

Arzoo Bano Mohd Khalid Ansari … Applicants

¶9

V/s.

¶10

The State of Maharashtra &

¶11

… Respondents

¶12

Shaikh Sayyada Sohrab Ahmed

¶13

Mr. Shaikh Atique Ur Rehman Shaikh for Applicants. Smt. Anamika Malhotra, Addl. P.P. for Respondent No.1-State.

¶14

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND

¶15

DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.

¶16

DATE : 8^th August 2024.

¶17

P.C. :

¶18

This is an Application under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. by husband (Applicant No.1), father-in-law (Applicant No.2), brother-in-law (Applicant No.3) and wife of brother-in-law (Applicant No.4) of Respondent

¶19

No.2, respectively, for quashing of C.R. No.0342 of 2024 dated 29^th June 2024, registered with Agripada Police Station, Mumbai, under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code, with the consent of Respondent No.2, the informant.

¶20

1. Learned Advocate for Respondent No.2 tendered across the bar

¶21

1/2

¶22

RVC 34 Apl-939-2024.doc

¶23

her Affidavit dated 8^th August 2024, duly affirmed before the Assistant Registrar of this Court. It is stated therein that, Respondent No.2, in order to reconcile and save her marriage, arrived at amicable settlement and she along with Applicant No.1 are cohabiting together in a separate rented premises. That, their disputes inter se now have been resolved. In para No.6 therefore, she has stated that, she has no grievance against the Applicants and withdraws all the complaints against them. In para No.7 therefore, she has given her consent for quashing of the crime in question.

¶24

2.1) Respondent No.2 is personally present in Court and through her Advocate, reiterates the contents of her Affidavit dated 8^th August 2024 and her ‘no objection’ for quashing of the C.R. No.0342 of 2024, registered with Agripada Police Station, Mumbai.

¶25

In view therefore, Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B).

¶26

( DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )

¶27

Digitally signed RAJESH by RAJESHVASANT VASANT CHITTEWAN CHITTEWAN Date: 2024.08.16 15:48:24 +0530

¶28

2/2

Mohd. Asif Shamim Ahmed Ansari and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Asif Shamim Ahmed Ansari and Ors. 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

Sameer Satishrao Karpe vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Piyush Birbal Gupta and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shalok Hari Nagpal and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Editors Guild of India vs Union of India

Veena Amol Bhurke vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Alok Amulya Biswas vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.