Sudhir Suresh Chavan v. Priyanka Sudhir Chavan and Anr.

Bombay HC20 Sept 2025WP/1752/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR; matrimonial dispute; amicable settlement; sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 IPC; section 13B Hindu Marriage Act; divorce by mutual consent; consent terms; demand draft Rs.3,00,000/-; Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466; Jat Police Station District Sangli; Bombay High Court Kolhapur Circuit Bench; Criminal Writ Petition Nos. 1752/2022 and 29/2022; husband, mother-in-law, sister-in-law; complainant affidavit; identity verified Aadhar Card.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of F.I.R. No.580 of 2021 dated 1st November, 2021 registered with Jat Police Station, District Sangli under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; both writ petitions allowed and disposed of. ¶¶27

Sudhir Suresh Chavan Vs Priyanka Sudhir Chavan and Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether First Information Report No.580 of 2021 dated 1st November, 2021 registered with Jat Police Station, District Sangli under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 should be quashed, in view of the amicable settlement arrived at between the petitioners and respondent No.1 – complainant.

¶¶16

Court's answer

Since the proceedings arose out of matrimonial discord which has since been amicably settled between the parties, and the parties have moved on after arriving at settlement by filing a divorce petition by mutual consent, no fruitful purpose will be served in continuing the criminal proceedings; this view is supported by Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶¶26

Ratio / Principle

Both Criminal Writ Petition No.29 of 2022 and Criminal Writ Petition No.1752 of 2022 are allowed, and F.I.R. No.580 of 2021 dated 1st November, 2021 registered with Jat Police Station, District Sangli under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is quashed.

¶¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur (M.S. Karnik & Sharmila U. Deshmukh, JJ.) — Criminal Writ Petition No.1752 of 2022 (preferred by the husband) and Criminal Writ Petition No.29 of 2022 (preferred by the mother-in-law and sister-in-law) sought quashing of F.I.R. No.580 of 2021 dated 1st November, 2021 registered with Jat Police Station, District Sangli under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Respondent No.1 – complainant tendered an affidavit stating that the parties had amicably settled the dispute, had filed a divorce petition by mutual consent under section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act before Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sangli, and did not desire to continue the criminal prosecution; pursuant to consent terms executed before the Civil Court, a demand draft of Rs.3,00,000/- had already been received by her. She appeared in Court and her identity was verified by her Counsel and Aadhar Card. Held: the proceedings arose out of matrimonial discord now settled and the parties have moved on, hence no fruitful purpose would be served in continuing the criminal proceedings — a view supported by Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466. Petitions allowed; F.I.R. quashed; petitions disposed of.

¶1

20-WP-1752--2022 & 29-2022.doc

¶2

Shailaja

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.1752 OF 2022

¶6

Sudhir Suresh Chavan ] Petitioner Vs. Priyanka Sudhir Chavan and another ] Respondents

¶7

a/w

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO.29 OF 2022

¶9

Sanjiwani Pradip Patil and another ] Petitioners Vs. Priyanka Sudhir Chavan and another ] Respondents

¶10

Mr. Pradhuman Chavan (through V.C.), for Petitioner in Writ Petition No.1752 of 2022.

¶11

Mr. Ramdas Shelke, for Petitioner in Writ Petition No.29 of 2022.

¶12

Ms. Harsha Khandelwal i/b Mr. Balwant Salunkhe, for Respondent No.1 in both the Writ Petitions.

¶13

Mr. A.A. Naik, A.P.P, for Respondent No.2 – State.

¶14

CORAM : M.S. KARNIK & SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, JJ

¶15

DATE : 20^th SEPTEMBER, 2025. P.C:

¶16

The petitions have been filed seeking quashing of First Information

¶17

Report bearing No.580 of 2021 (for short “F.I.R”) dated 1^st November, 2021 registered with Jat Police Station, District Sangli under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶18

1 of 3

¶19

SHAILAJASHRIKANT Digitally signed by SHAILAJASHRIKANT HALKUDEDate: 2025.09.20 17:06:55 HALKUDE +0530

¶20

20-WP-1752--2022 & 29-2022.doc

¶21

Criminal Writ Petition No.29 of 2022 has been preferred by the mother-in-law and sister-in-law of respondent No.1 – complainant and Criminal Writ Petition No.1752 of 2022 has been preferred by husband of respondent No.1 – complainant.

¶22

Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 has tendered an affidavit of the respondent No.1 – complainant. The same is taken on record. She submits that the parties have amicably settled the dispute and have filed divorce petition by mutual consent under section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act before Civil Judge, Senior Division, Sangli and respondent No.1 does not desire to continue with the criminal prosecution. She would further submit that pursuant to the consent terms which were executed before the Civil Court, the demand draft of Rs.3,00,000/- has already been received by respondent No.1 – complainant. She submits that in view of the settlement which has been arrived at between the petitioners and respondent No.1 – complainant, respondent No.1 – complainant has no objection if F.I.R bearing No.580 of 2021 is quashed.

¶23

The Respondent No.1 – complainant is present in the Court and reiterates the terms of the consent terms. Her identity is verified by her Counsel and by her Aadhar Card, copy of which is placed on record.

¶24

2 of 3

¶25

20-WP-1752--2022 & 29-2022.doc

¶26

Considering that the proceedings arose out of a matrimonial discord which have now been settled between the parties and the parties have moved on after arriving at settlement by filing divorce petition by mutual consent, no fruitful purpose will be served in continuing the criminal proceedings. The view taken by us is supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another reported in 2012 (10) Supreme Court Cases, 303 and Narinder Singh and others Vs State of Punjab and another (2014) 6 Supreme Court Cases 466.

¶27

In light of the above, Criminal Writ Petition No.29 of 2022 and Criminal Writ Petition No.1752 of 2022 are allowed. F.I.R. bearing No.580 of 2021 dated 1^st November, 2021 registered with Jat Police Station, District Sangli under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is quashed.

¶28

The petitions are disposed of.

¶29

[SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.] [M.S. KARNIK, J.]

¶30

3 of 3

Sudhir Suresh Chavan v. Priyanka Sudhir Chavan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir Suresh Chavan v. Priyanka Sudhir Chavan and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Baswani Dhondiba Patil Vs The State of Maharashtra

Savita D/O Dnyanoba Kharat Vs the State of Maharashtra Thru Secretary, Education Dept. and Ors.

Sarth Magisvarghiya Aaudyogik Sahkari Sanastha Maryadit, Thr. Chairman Shri. Suryakant B. Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary and Ors.

Sanjiwani Pradip Patil and Anr. Vs Priyanka Sudhir Chavan and Anr.

Vedansh Rajendra Sawant Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Saklen Shabbir Mulla Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. the Secretary School Education and Sports Dept. and Ors.