Dhruv Bharat Parmar and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

1. This is a Petition for quashing of the proceedings pending before the J.M.F.C., Mira-Bhayandar bearing No.6212/2025 arising out of C.R. No.317/2022 registered at

¶12

Mira Road police station on 4.8.2022 under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of IPC.

¶13

1 of 4

¶14

Deshmane(PS)

¶15

: 2 : 37-wp-5432-24.odt

¶16

2. Heard Ms. Duraiya Retiwala, learned counsel for

¶17

the Petitioners, Ms. Sangeeta Shinde, learned APP for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State and Mr. Ashraf Kapoor, learned counsel for the Respondent No.3.

¶18

3. The Petitioner No.1 is the husband of the Respondent No.3. The Petitioner No.2 is her mother-in-law and the Petitioner No.3 is her sister-in-law. The parties have settled the matter and, therefore, the prayer is made for quashing of the criminal prosecution by consent. In this situation, it is not necessary to refer to the allegations in detail. However,, briefly stated, the allegations are that the Respondent No.3 got in contact with the Petitioner No.1 through a matrimonial website. They decided to get married. Accordingly they entered into Court marriage on 14.9.2021 and performed marriage as per the rituals on 27.11.2020. There are allegations that the stridhan which was given to her was misappropriated by the Petitioners. The FIR thereafter goes on to mention various instances in which she was ill-treated. There are various instances of ill-treatment and harassment.

¶19

2 of 4

¶20

: 3 : 37-wp-5432-24.odt

¶21

There was difficulty in their personal physical relationship as well. On all these allegations, the FIR is lodged.

¶22

4. The charge-sheet contains the statements of her parents and uncle. They have supported her allegations. In this background, now the matter is settled between the parties. The Respondent No.3 has filed her affidavit-in-reply giving her consent for quashing of the present FIR and the subject matter of this Petition. She is present before the Court. She is identified by her learned counsel. She stated before the Court that she has no objection if the proceedings are quashed. She submitted that she has filed the consent affidavit out of her own volition and willingness.

¶23

5. In this situation, since the dispute is settled between the parties, no purpose would be served by continuing with the criminal prosecution. Therefore, we are inclined to allow this Petition.

¶24

6. Hence, the following order:

3 of 4

37-wp-5432-24.odt

: 4 :

:: O R D E R ::

i. The FIR being C.R. No.317/2022 registered at Mira Road police station as well as the criminal prosecution being Case No.6212/2025 pending before the J.M.F.C., Mira-Bhayandar, are quashed and set aside.

¶30

ii. The Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶31

( SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

¶32

Deshmane (PS)

¶33

Digitally signed by PRADIPKUMARPRAKASHRAODESHMANE PRADIPKUMARPRAKASHRAODESHMANEDate: 2025.10.07 12:30:01 +0530

¶34

4 of 4

Dhruv Bharat Parmar and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhruv Bharat Parmar and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ganesh Shivaji Gangurde vs State of Maharashtra

Sakalsingh Haridas Pawar vs the State of Maharashtra

Samadhan Dadaji Dhivare vs State of Maharashtra

Jayesh @ Dwarkanath Sopan Gawand vs State of Maharashtra

Amol Eknath Gangawane vs State of Maharashtra

Digambar Gundu Sawant and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra