Allowed

Amey Arvind Rokde and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC30 Aug 2024WP/264/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition sought quashing of an FIR and RCC arising from marital discord allegations under IPC Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34. The complainant-wife filed a consent affidavit affirming amicable settlement and no objection to quashing; the High Court quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.21 of 2023 and R.C.C. No.344 of 2024 quashed and set aside in terms of prayer clause (a).

Amey Arvind Rokde and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AS:37661

¶2

rdg 25-wp-264-2024-O.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.264 OF 2024

¶6

Amey Arvind Rokde, Age: 45 years, Occu: Service, Residing at Flat No.903, Pride Platinum, NR Pancard Club, Baner, Pune – 411 045.

¶7

Arvind Babasa Rokde, Age: 83 years, Occu: Retired, Residing at Flat No.903, Pride Platinum, NR Pancard Club, Baner, Pune – 411 045.

¶8

Snehal Arvind Rokde, Age: 75 years, Occu: Homemaker, Residing at Flat No.903, Pride Platinum, NR Pancard Club, Baner, Pune – 411 045.

¶9

Digvijay Vasant Gulalkari, Age: 56 years, Occu: Business, Residing at 11, Suvidha Co-op. Housing Society, Sector 5, Panvel, Raigarh – 410 206.

¶10

Aboly Digvijay Gulalkari, Age: 55 years, Occu: Homemaker, Residing at 11, Suvidha Co-op. Housing Society, Sector 5, Panvel, Raigarh – 410 206. …..Petitioners

¶11

Vs.

¶12

The State of Maharashtra, Through the office of Gangapur Police Station, Nashik.

¶13

Kalyani Amey Rokde, Aged: 41 years, Occu: Service,

¶14

1/3

¶15

rdg 25-wp-264-2024-O.doc

¶16

R/o. Flat No.6, Trushna Society, Savarkar Nagar, Gangapur Road, Nashik. …..Respondents

¶17

Mr. R. R. Patil, for the Petitioners. Smt. Madhavi H. Mhatre, APP, for Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Suvarna Yadav, for Respondent No.2. Ms. Kalyani A. Rokde, Respondent No.2 present.

¶18

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND DR NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : 20^th SEPTEMBER, 2024.

¶19

P.C.:

¶20

Petitioners seek to quash and set aside R.C.C. No.344 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. bearing No. 21 of 2023 dated 11^th January 2023 registered with Gangapur Police Station, Nashik for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”).

¶21

Petitioner No. 1 is the husband of Respondent No.2. Petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 5 are father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of Respondent No.2 respectively. Petitioner No.4 is the husband of Petitioner No.5. According to Respondent No.2, Petitioner No.1 married her on 14^th December 2006. There was some acrimony and marital discord between the parties which led the Respondent No.2 to lodge the aforesaid FIR with the Gangapur Police Station, Thane.

¶22

Mr. R. R. Patil, learned counsel appears for the Petitioners and Ms. Suvarna Yadav appears for the Respondent No.2. Ms. M. H. Mhatre, learned APP represents the State.

¶23

2/3

¶24

rdg 25-wp-264-2024-O.doc

¶25

It appears that in the interregnum, the parties decided to amicably resolve their disputes. Respondent No.2 has filed consent Affidavit dated 20^th April 2024 duly affirmed before the Notary Public. In the consent Affidavit, the Respondent No.2 has stated that the dispute and difference between her and the Petitioners have been amicably settled. In paragraph No. 7 thereof, she has given her consent for quashing of the F.I.R. 5) Respondent No.2 is personally present in Court. Through her counsel, she reiterates the contents of her consent Affidavit and her no objection to quash the criminal proceedings pending against the Petitioners. 6) Thus considering the facts in the present case and the consent Affidavit of the Respondent No.2, criminal proceedings bearing R.C.C. No.344 of 2024 arising out of F.I.R. bearing No. 21 of 2023 dated 11^th January 2023 registered with Gangapur Police Station, Nashik is quashed and set aside.

¶26

Petition is accordingly, allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶27

(DR NEELA GOKHALE, J.)

¶28

(A.S. GADKARI, J.)

¶29

3/3

¶30

Signed by: Raju D. Gaikwad Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 23/09/2024 18:16:19

Amey Arvind Rokde and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amey Arvind Rokde and Ors. v. the 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

Kishor Balaso Bhagate and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Niket Babasaheb Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rasika Ramesh Salve @ Rasika Indrasen Misal vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Paresh Vinodchandra Panchal and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Hussain Hasanali Lakhani vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Devdatta Vasant Bharde vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.