Dixit 1 WP-2677-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2677 OF 2011 Pradip Shankar Rao alias Shervegar ... Petitioner V/s. Rajashree Pradip Rao & Anr. ... Respondents Mr. Ramesh Pandey for the Petitioner. Mr. Sundar Mendon for Respondent No.1. Mrs. S.D. Shinde, A.P.P., for Respondent No.2. Mr. Madhusudan Kalthur, Father of Respondent No.1, is present in person. CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR & R.G. KETKAR, JJ. DATE : 18 TH NOVEMBER, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent. 3. Learned Counsel waives notice for their respective parties. 4. The relief claimed in this Petition is for quashing of F.I.R. No.348 of 2009 Dixit 2 WP-2677-11 registered at the instance of the Respondent No.1 at M.I.D.C. Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 of Indian Penal Code. It is noticed that the incident in question is essentially pertaining to matrimonial dispute between the Petitioner and Respondent No.1, who were married on 25th April, 2004. The matrimonial disputes have now been amicably resolved between the parties. The Petitioner/husband and Respondent No.1/wife have already filed consent terms dated 28th April, 2010 before the Family Court at Bandra. As per the arrangement referred to in the said Consent Terms, it is agreed by the Respondent No.1 that she will not precipitate the complaint registered by her against the Petitioner and she will consent for quashing of F.I.R.. The said position is reiterated by the father of the Respondent No.1, who is personally present in the Court. Respondent No.1 is a working woman, for which reason her father is present in Court. It is noticed that the parties have agreed for the said arrangement with full understanding and without any duress or coercion from any quarter. Learned APP submits that since the offence is not compoundable offence, she may leave it to the Court to consider the request of the private parties. 5. In our considered opinion, since Petitioner and Respondent No.1 have amicably resolved all their matrimonial issues and have decided to part company of each other and to begin their future career anew, it would be in the interest of Dixit 3 WP-2677-11 justice of all concerned that the relief claimed in this Petition in terms of prayer clause 12(A) is granted. The joint request made by the parties, if accepted, is in no manner opposed to public policy. The Respondent No.1 has no intention of pursuing any criminal action against the Petitioner. As aforesaid, she has given declaration that she would give consent for quashing of F.I.R. Besides, the father of the Respondent No.1 is also supporting the stand taken by the Respondent No. 1. 6. Taking overall view of the matter, in the interest of justice, we allow this Petition in terms of prayer clause 12(A) which reads thus :- “12(A). That the Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ order or direction and quash and set aside the F.I.R. No.348 of 2009 registered with the M.I.D.C. Police Station and case No.2424/PW/2009 currently before the 22nd Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Andheri, Mumbai against the Petitioner.” 7. Ordered accordingly. [R.G. KETKAR, J.] [A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.]