1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 861 OF 2010 Hiren Mehta and Ors. ...Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents ----- Mr.R.T. Lalwani for Petitioners Mr.S.R. Shinde  APP for State ------ CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 26TH APRIL, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners. 2. The father of the Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. He is also the power of attorney holder of the Respondent No.2. He has filed affidavit stating that the Respondent No.2 has given him the power of attorney to represent her in this Court. He has stated in the affidavit that they have no objection if the criminal complaint vide CC No. 3434/PW/2008 (FIR No. 163/2008) is quashed. 2 3. This petition has been filed by the Petitioners under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal case No. 3434 /PW/2008 pending in the 26 th Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Borivali arising out of FIR No.163 of 2008 The Respondent No.2 is the wife of the Petitioner No.1. The Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the Respondent No.2 and the Petitioner Nos.4 and 5 are the sister-in-law and the brother-in-law of the Respondent No.2. After the marriage of the Petitioner No.1 and the Respondent No.2, there were some disputes and differences between them and consequently, the Petitioner No.1 filed petition for dissolution of marriage. This petition was subsequently converted into the petition for divorce by mutual consent. However, during the pendency of the petition, the Respondent No.2 filed a complaint which was registered with the Kasturba Marg Police Station for the offence punishable under sections 498 (A) (B), 406 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the case is now pending in the 26 th Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Borivali, Mumbai. 4. Thereafter, the parties have settled their dispute and the consent terms were filed in the Family Court at Bandra. In paragraph 9(i) of the Consent Terms, the Respondent No.2 has agreed to 3 withdraw the complaint which was filed at her instance vide FIR No. 163 of 2008 on 19 th August, 2008. The Family Court, Bandra, by order dated 25 th January, 2010 has passed a decree of divorce. In view of the Consent terms which were filed by both these parties, the Petitioner has now filed the application for quashing the complaint. The Respondent No.2 also has filed her affidavit which is annexed at Exhibit  B to the petition dated 3 rd March, 2010. The Respondent No.2, thereafter had to leave the country and, therefore, the Respondent No.2 has given the power of attorney to her father to represent her in this Court. He has also filed an affidavit before this Court dated 26 th April, 2010. In view of the consent terms which were filed in the Family Court and since the Respondent No.2 and her father, both have filed their affidavits stating that they have no objection if the complaint is quashed, in my view, in the interest of justice and in the interest of the Respondent No.2, the said complaint will have to be quashed. 6. The Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and Ors. vs. State of Haryana and Anr. reported in AIR 2003 Supreme Court 1386,has observed that this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has inherent powers to quash the complaint 4 and the said power is not curtailed by the restrictions which have been imposed under section 320 of the Cr.P.C. In view of the said judgment, this Court is entitled to quash the said complaint. 7. The Petition is, accordingly, allowed and disposed of and is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). (V.M. KANADE J.)