Allowed

Mehboob Masqsood Ali Pathan and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC27 Jun 2024WP/1829/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Criminal Writ Petition No. 1829 of 2024 (A. S. Gadkari and Dr. Neela Gokhale, JJ.), decided 11 July 2024. Quashing of criminal case C.C. No. 1815/PW/2023 (Metropolitan Magistrate, 49th Court, Vikhroli, Mumbai) arising out of C.R. No. 932 of 2022 (Ghatkopar Police Station, Mumbai) for offences under Sections 498(A), 323, 504 & 506 IPC read with Sections 3 & 4 of the Muslim Women

What did the court decide?

Quashing of C.C. No. 1815/PW/2023 arising out of C.R. No. 932 of 2022, granted in terms of prayer clause (a) with the consent of Respondent No. 2.

Mehboob Masqsood Ali Pathan and Anr. vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Gitalaxmi 16-wp-1829-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1829 OF 2024

¶4

Mr. Mehboob Maqsood Ali Pathan & Ors.

¶5

…..Petitioners

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Anr. …..Respondents

¶8

Mr. Mohd. Ahmed for the Petitioners. Mr. Anand S. Shalgaonkar, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State Ms. Anees Shaikh for the Respondent No. 2. P.S.I. A. S. Jadhav, Ghatkopar Police Station, Mumbai present.

¶9

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

¶10

P.C.:-

¶11

Petitioners i.e. husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of Respondent No. 2 have filed present Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for quashing of C.C. No. 1815/PW/2023 pending on the file of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 49^th Court at Vikhroli, Mumbai, arising out of C. R. No. 932 of 2022 registered with Ghatkopar Police Station, Mumbai for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 323, 504 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Sections 3 & 4 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, with the consent of Respondent No. 2.

¶12

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

¶13

1/2

¶14

Gitalaxmi 16-wp-1829-2024.doc

¶15

Petitioner No. 1 and the Respondent No. 2 have settled their disputes and differences amicably and have executed the Consent Terms dated 3^rd October 2023 in C.C. No. 259/DVC/2022 before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 57^th Court at Kurla, Mumbai. That, in pursuance of the said Consent Terms, the Respondent No. 2 is now giving her consent for quashing of the said case.

¶16

Learned Advocate for the Petitioners submitted that, the Respondent No. 2 has filed an Affidavit dated 12^th December 2023, duly affirmed before a Notary Public. In the said Affidavit, the Respondent No. 2 has admitted the fact of execution of Deed of Settlement with Petitioner No. 1 and has expressed her desire in not continuing with the prosecution against Petitioners. She has also stated that, she has no grievance against any of the Petitioners, accused persons in the present crime. He therefore prayed that, the said case may be quashed with the consent of Respondent No. 2.

¶17

3.1) Respondent No. 2 is personally present in the Court and through her Advocate reiterates the contents of her Affidavit dated 12^th December 2023 and her ‘no objection’ for quashing of the present case.

¶18

In view of the above, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶19

(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.)

¶20

(A. S. GADKARI, J.)

¶21

GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR

¶22

2/2

¶23

Digitally signed by GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR Date: 2024.07.18 12:24:43 +0530

Mehboob Masqsood Ali Pathan and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mehboob Masqsood Ali Pathan and Anr. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pankaj Ashok Sharma and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ravi Shankar Bhatkar vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sunny Mahesh Doshi and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Anoop Kurup and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shadab Sikandar Shaikh and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Jayesh Harilal Soni and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.