mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4926 OF 2009 Mehul Surji Savla ... Applicant versus Mrs.Meghna Mehul Savla & ors ... Respondents ... Mrs. Vasanti Joshi for the applicant. Mr.I.A. Raibakkar for respondent no.1. Mr.A.S.Shitole APP for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 20th November 2009 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This application arises out of an FIR filed u/s.498A, 406 r/w section 34 of the IPC. The FIR arose out of the matrimonial dispute between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.1. Petitioner nos.2 to 4 are relatives of petitioner no.1. Learned counsel for the petitioners state that a dispute between the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.1 has been settled and a decree for divorce has been obtained by mutual consent. Counsel for respondent no.1, on instructions of respondent no. 1 who is present in the court, confirms that the dispute has been settled and states that the respondent no.1 does not want to continue with the prosecution as the matrimonial disputes have been settled. 2. In B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003(4) SCC 675, the Supreme Court has held in similar circumstances that in such cases the criminal prosecutions, as well as an FIR can be quashed. In view of the fact that dispute has been settled and respondent no.2 himself does not wish to continue to prosecute, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution and/or further investigation under the FIR. 3. For these reasons, application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). (D.G. KARNIK,J.)