The court allowed an application to quash an FIR registered for matrimonial offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, and 506 IPC, following a compromise deed between the applicants and the accused wife.
The criminal application seeking quashment of the FIR and consequent charges stands allowed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2024:BHC-AUG:9459-DB
(1) 1017criapln875.23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
1017 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 875 OF 2023
PRATIK OMPRAKASHJI BHAKKAD AND OTHERS
….Applicants VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
…..Respondents
Mr. R. A. Karwa, Advocate for the applicants Mr. Y. R. Pallod, Advocate Mr. B. S. Choure, Advocate for respondent No.2
Mrs. V. N. Patil-Jadhav, APP for the respondents/State
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ. DATE : 03rd MAY, 2024
P. C.
1 of 2
(2) 1017criapln875.23
charge-sheet consequently regular criminal case.
allowed.
[SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.]
[MANGESH S. PATIL, J.]
VishalK/1017criapln875.23
2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings for matrimonial offences should be quashed in view of a compromise deed between the parties.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Pratik Omprakashji Bhakkad and Others
The State of Maharashtra
Another
Mangesh S. Patil
Shailesh P. Brahme
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
