Allowed

Mudit Mohan v. Rushali Verma and Anr.

Bombay HC15 Mar 2024WP/865/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Husband and in-laws sought quashing of a criminal case registered at Mundhwa Police Station under Sections 498(A), 506(2), 323, 352 and 504 r/w 34 IPC after an amicable settlement. Respondent No. 1 consented by affidavit and reiterated her no-objection in court. The court allowed both petitions in terms of prayer clause (a).

What did the court decide?

Both petitions allowed in terms of prayer clause (a): R.C.C. No. 800 of 2022 / crime in question quashed.

Mudit Mohan vs Rushali Verma and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Gitalaxmi 18-wp-862-2024 with wp-865-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 862 OF 2024

¶5

Davesh Sahay Srivastava & Ors. …..Petitioners

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Rushali Verma & Anr. …..Respondents

¶8

WITH

¶9

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 865 OF 2024

¶10

Mudit Mohan …..Petitioner

¶11

Vs.

¶12

Rushali Verma & Anr. …..Respondents

¶13

Mr. Sudarshan M. Desai a/w Mr. Ishaan Patkar for the Petitioners. Mr. Rohit Joshi a/w Ms. Mitali Dhoble for the Respondent. Mr. Vinit A. Kulkarni, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State.

¶14

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : 3^rd JULY 2024

¶15

P.C.:-

¶16

Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 862 of 2024 are the in-laws and

¶17

the Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 865 of 2024 is the husband of Respondent No. 1.

¶18

1.1) By the aforenoted Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners have prayed for quashing of R.C.C. No.

¶19

1/2

¶20

Gitalaxmi 18-wp-862-2024 with wp-865-2024.doc

¶21

800 of 2022 pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Cantonment, Pune, arising out of C.R. No. 55 of 2022 dated 25^th February 2022 registered with Mundhwa Police Station, Pune City for the offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 506(2), 323, 352 & 504 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 with the consent of Respondent No. 2, victim.

¶22

Learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 1 tendered across the bar her Affidavit/s dated 24^th June 2024, duly affirmed before a Notary Public, in the aforenoted two Petitions. In the said Affidavit/s, Respondent No. 1 has admitted the fact of amicable settlement between her and the Petitioners. That, the Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 865 of 2024 and Respondent No. 1 have already filed proceedings before the Family Court at Pune for divorce by mutual consent. In paragraph no. 8 thereof, the Respondent No. 1 has given her consent to quash and set aside the crime in question. He therefore prayed that, the said case may be quashed with the consent of Respondent No. 1.

¶23

2.1) Respondent No. 1 is personally present in the Court and through her Advocate reiterates the contents of her Affidavit/s dated 24^th June 2024 and her ‘no objection’ for quashing of the crime in question.

¶24

In view thereof, Petitions are allowed in terms of prayer clause

¶25

(a) of both the Petitions.

¶26

(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.)

¶27

(A. S. GADKARI, J.)

¶28

GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR

¶29

2/2

¶30

Digitally signed by GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR Date: 2024.07.16 10:56:51 +0530

Mudit Mohan v. Rushali Verma and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mudit Mohan v. Rushali Verma 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

Nitin Alias Dattatray Chindhu Kalate vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shamshuddin Nuruddin Dosani and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bomi Rustamji Karanjia and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Editors Guild of India vs Union of India

Gopal Raja Nadar and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Davesh Sahay Srivastava and Ors. vs Rusahli Verma and Anr.