Quashed

Chandrabhaga J Kondalkar v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC6 Sept 2024WP/3862/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

FIR alleging forgery of a Will and bogus documents to claim rights in a Thane flat was sought to be quashed after the complainant and petitioners reached a mediated settlement in their civil suit. With the complainant's affidavit and consent, the Court quashed the FIR against all three accused under Section 482 Cr.P.C., subject to payment of costs.

What the court decided

AI extract

Chandrabhaga J Kondalkar vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

RUSHIKESHVISHNUPATIL Digitallysigned byRUSHIKESHVISHNUPATILDate:2024.12.0411:08:35+0530

¶2

1/5 501 WP.3862.2024.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 3862 OF 2024

¶5

Chandrabhaga J. Kondalkar and Ors. .. Petitioners Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents

¶7

Ms Priyanka Dable, for the Petitioners. Mr. D. J. Haldankar, APP, for the Respondent – State.

¶8

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &

¶9

MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED : 29^th NOVEMBER, 2024

¶10

P.C:-

¶11

Not on Board.

¶12

Taken on production Board, at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, since according to her a settlement is worked out between the parties, and since they have traveled from outstation, looking at their advanced age, we directed the Petition to be taken up for hearing.

¶13

The Petition is fled by Ms Chandrabhaga Kondalkar praying for quashing of the FIR No.0081 of 2022, registered with Kopari Police Station, Thane, at the instance of Respondent No. 2, which had invoked the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 471, 379 and 34 of the IPC.

¶14

The learned counsel for the petitioner submit that since the FIR was registered against 2 more persons i.e. Lalita Thakur and Kishor Nakhwa, she may be permitted to implead

¶15

R.V.Patil

¶16

2/5 501 WP.3862.2024.odt

¶17

them as petitioners, as the settlement with Respondent No. 2 is a comprehensive settlement, and the FIR deserve to be quashed against the two other accused persons also.

¶18

Respondent No.2 as well as the learned APP has no objection in permitting the said amendment.

¶19

Let the learned counsel for the petitioner carry out the amendment forthwith by impleading Lalita Thakur and Kishor Nakhwa as Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 in the Petition. Reverifcation dispensed with.

¶20

The Petition seek quashment of the FIR, registered with Kopari Police Station against the petitioners, where petitioner No. 1 was accused of preparing bogus and forged documents by purchasing a stamp paper at Vashi and forging signature on the Will, which was prepared by an Advocate and notarized from other Advocate. It is also alleged that she was working as a maid servant with deceased Bhimashankar Chulaman Barapatre, and she is accused of forging the documents to create rights in the property i.e. Flat No.18/B, Kopineshwar CHS, Mith-Bunder Road, Near Siddhivinayak Temple, Thane (East).

¶21

It is worth to note that a suit was fled by Chandrabhaga Kondalkar for possession, declaration and perpetual injunction, in which Exhibit- 5, which was fled by the plaintiff was allowed and issues were settled and the matter was slated for recording of evidence of the plaintiff.

¶22

During its pendency, the parties were referred for mediation, where a compromise was reached which was placed

¶23

R.V.Patil

¶24

3/5 501 WP.3862.2024.odt

¶25

before the Civil Judge, Junior Division and JMFC, Thane alongwith the report of mediation, refecting that an amicable settlement is arrived between the parties, and upon the plaintiff receiving an sum of Rs.15,00,000/- from the defendant, she has undertaken that she will not cause any obstruction to the defendant while enjoying the suit property. Pursuant to the said settlement, the Regular Civil Suit No. 634 of 2019 was disposed off by the Civil Judge Junior Division at Thane, on 29.07.2024 by ordering as under:

¶26

“RCS No.634 of 2019 is disposed of as settled in mediation in view of Mediation report Exh. 48 and compromise deed Exh. 49.”

¶27

Decree shall be drawn up accordingly.

¶28

Court fee shall be refunded to the plaintiff as per rule.”

¶29

It is in the wake of this settlement, Respondent No.2, Devanand Barapatre has fled an affdavit affrmed on 28.11.2024, stating that he had lodged the private complaint under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C., pursuant to which C.R.No. I-81/2022 was registered with Kopari Police Station, Thane, against Chandrabhaga Kondalkar, Kishor Nakhwa and Lalita Thakur.

¶30

In paragraph 4 he has deposed that the settlement is arrived between the parties and this was placed before the Civil Court Thane, which was entrusted the Civil Suit No. 634 of 2019 fled by Chandrabhaga Kondalkar, under Section 6 of the Specifc Relief Act.

¶31

The affdavit record the following statement of the Respondent No.2:

¶32

“5. I say that, in view of the Said Consent Terms, the

¶33

R.V.Patil

¶34

4/5 501 WP.3862.2024.odt

¶35

Respondent No.2 (Original Complainant ) have agreed to withdraw all the complaints / allegation against me hence it was most humbly prayed vide this Writ petition that the FIR fled by the Respondent No. 2 (Ori.Complainant) vide C.R.No. I 81/2022, against all the three Accused i.e. 1. myself Chandrabhaga J. Kondalkar, 2. Kishor D. Nakhva, 3. Lalita R. Thakur, may kindly be quashed and set aside and appropriate order may be passed in the interest of law and justice.

¶36

I say that, I'm swearing this Affdavit to fle before this Hon'ble High Court, Mumbai, in the captioned Writ petition.”

¶37

Respondent No.2, Mr. Devanand Yashwant Barapatre is present in the Court and his identity is verifed by the Court Sheristedar through his Aadhar Card.

¶38

Copy of the Aadhar Card is annexed with the affdavit fled by him. In addition, the affdavit is also accompanied with the photocopy of the two cheques issued by him in the name of the Petitioner No. 1. When we queried with Respondent No.2, Devanand Barapatre, who is present before us about the contents of the affdavit, he categorically informed us that he has affrmed the said affdavit, and he has no objection if the subject FIR against three accused persons (the petitioners before us) is quashed and set aside, as compromise is effected and an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs only) is already paid to Petitioner No. 1.

¶39

Chandrabhaga Kondalkar, Petitioner No. 1 is also present before us, and her identity is established by the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 2. Copy of her Aadhar Card is also annexed alongwith her affdavit.

¶40

Similarly, Petitioner No.1, Chandrabhaga Kondalkar has also fled an affdavit, affrmed on 28.11.2024, which is

¶41

R.V.Patil

¶42

5/5 501 WP.3862.2024.odt

¶43

notarized before the notary in Thane, and she has also made reference to the settlement effected between the parties.

¶44

The affdavits alongwith its accompaniments are taken on record.

¶45

In the wake of the settlement effected between the parties and since Respondent No. 2 has no objection in quashing of the subject FIR and against the petitioners and since we are of the clear view that continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners would be nothing but abuse of process, as the petitioner No. 1 has accepted the amount and agreed to permit enjoyment of the property by Respondent No. 2, the discord between the parties stand settled.

¶46

In the wake of the above, we quash and set aside FIR No.0081 of 2022, registered with Kopari Police Station, Thane, against the petitioners, in exercise of our power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, subject to pay cost of Rs.5,000/- by the Petitioner No. 1, to the Central Police Welfare Fund within a period of two weeks from the date of uploading of the present order.

¶47

The details of bank account for payment of cost are as follows:

¶48

Bank Name	: Axis Bank Limited
Branch Name	: Worli, Mumbai (M.H.), Mumbai -400 025
Account Name	: Central Police Welfare Fund
Account Number	: 914010029005759
IFSC Code	: UTIB0000060

¶49

(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

¶50

R.V.Patil

Chandrabhaga J Kondalkar v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Chandrabhaga J Kondalkar v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mahesh Vasantrao Motaphale vs State of Maharashtra

Manoj Changdev Jadhav vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Babu @ Sameer Gopal Gogavale vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunita Harish Phadtare vs Harish Hanmant Phadtare

Sunita Harish Phadtare vs Harish Hanmant Phadtare

Sheikh Amin Akhtar and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.