Allowed

Neelam Nimit Gajjar v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC7 May 2024WP/1655/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR/crime on amicable settlement with victim-complainants; matrimonial dispute between wife-petitioner and husband/mother-in-law; Sections 323, 324 & 325 IPC; C. R. No. 818 of 2023, Borivali Police Station, Mumbai; writ under Article 226 Constitution read with Section 482 CrPC; joint affidavit dated 17 May 2024 with no objection; victims personally present and consenting; Criminal Writ

What did the court decide?

Quashing of C. R. No. 818 of 2023 registered with Borivali Police Station, Mumbai, granted in terms of prayer clause (a).

Neelam Nimit Gajjar vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Gitalaxmi 54-wp-1655-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1655 OF 2024

¶5

Neelam Nimit Gajjar …..Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Ors. …..Respondents

¶8

Mr. Hitesh Patel for the Petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Vinit A. Kulkarni, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State. Mr. Kunal V. Phoole for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3. A.P.I. Mr. Ratilal Tadwi, Borivali Police Station, Mumbai present.

¶10

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : 11^th JULY 2024

¶11

P.C.:-

¶12

Petitioner, Accused in C. R. No. 818 of 2023 dated 24^th December 2023 registered with Borivali Police Station, Mumbai for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324 & 325 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, has invoked jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for quashing of the said crime with the consent of Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 i.e. the victims of crime.

¶13

At the outset it is to be noted here that, the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 are the husband and mother-in-law respectively of the Petitioner.

¶14

Perusal of the First Information Report indicates that, the

¶15

1/2

¶16

Gitalaxmi 54-wp-1655-2024.doc

¶17

alleged assault took place in the matrimonial house of Petitioner and in a melee which ensued out of a petty quarrel.

¶18

Learned Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 submitted that, the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 and the Petitioner have settled their disputes and differences amicably and the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 have filed a joint Affidavit dated 17^th May 2024, duly affirmed before a Notary Public. In the said Affidavit, the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 have admitted the fact of amicable settlement on mutually agreed terms and in paragraph nos. 6 & 7 thereof, they have given their no objection for quashing of the crime in question.

¶19

4.1) Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 are personally present in the Court and through their Advocate reiterates the contents of their joint Affidavit dated 17^th May 2024 and their ‘no objection’ for quashing of the crime in question. 5) In view of the above, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer

¶20

clause (a).

¶21

(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.)

¶22

(A. S. GADKARI, J.)

¶23

GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR

¶24

Digitally signed by GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR Date: 2024.07.18 20:11:37 +0530

¶25

2/2

Neelam Nimit Gajjar v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neelam Nimit Gajjar v. the 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ravindra Anant Worlikar vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vinayak Shantwan Shinde vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ajit Prabhakar Kulkarni vs the State of Maharashtra

Shahid Umar Bhagad and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mohammad Mansuri vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Dhiraj Ramkrishna Kothawale vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.