- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3383 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.3383 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.3383 OF 2008 Farhan Badruddin Kazi and others ...Applicants vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Ms Malika A. Ingale for the applicants Mr.Rajesh More A.P.P. for State Mrs.Dilshad Dilwas Kazi, the Respondent no.2 in peson CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : APRIL 15,2009 : APRIL 15,2009 : APRIL 15,2009 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicant and the 2nd respondent in person. I have also heard the learned A.P.P. for State. The second respondent is the first informant who lodged F.I.R. alleging commission of offences under section 498-A, 406 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant and the second respondent married on 11th May 1996. The second applicant is the brother of the first applicant and the 3rd and 4th applicant are the parents of the first applicant. The prayer in this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 is for quashing the criminal proceedings initiated at the instance of the second respondent. the prayer for quashing is based on the compromise arrived at between the first applicant and the second respondent in the pending proceeding in the Family Court at Bombay. Reliance has been placed on consent terms filed in the Family Court. It is contended that now there is - 2 - a complete settlement between the first applicant and the second respondent. 2. The second respondent has tendered her own affidavit in which she has accepted the fact that the dispute between the first applicant and herself has been settled before the Family Court and the first applicant has already deposited a sum of Rs.7,10,000/- in terms of the settlement. The second respondent has stated that she has no objection for quashing the proceedings. However, she apprehends that proceedings may be initiated against her on account of consent granted by her for quashing the proceedings. 3. Perusal of the consent terms and affidavit filed by the second respondent shows that there is a complete settlement between the first applicant and the second respondent in the matrimonial dispute. Perusal of the F.I.R. shows that the matrimonial dispute resulted in lodging the F.I.R. Now no purpose will be served by continuing the criminal proceedings. The continuation of proceedings will cause undue harassment to both the parties. As there is a complete settlement between the parties, the applicant cannot initiate any proceedings on the basis of the consent granted by the second respondent for quashing the proceedings. 4. Hence, application is disposed of by passing the following - 3 - order : i) Subject to what is observed above, application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). The bail bonds of the applicants stand cancelled. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE