bsb 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 WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 449 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 449 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 449 OF 2008 Smt. Kalpana G. Kapoor ... Petitioner v/s Shri Gulshan Lohiram Kapoor & ors. ... Respondents Mr. Diwakar V. Gond for the petitioner. Mr.Mangesh Patel for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Smt.A.A.Mane, A.P.P. for the respondent State. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DATED: DATED: 16TH APRIL, 2008 16TH APRIL, 2008 16TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. The petitioner is the wife of the 1st respondent. The other respondents are relatives of the 1st respondent. The petitioner has married the 1st respondent on 30.1.2006. The petitioner left the matrimonial home on 17.6.2006 due to certain disputes with the respondents. A complaint was lodged against the respondents alleging that they have committed offence under Sections 498-A, 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner also alleged that respondent No.1 had not returned the "streedhan". 2. Now it appears that the petitioner, who is present 2 in Court, and the respondents have settled their disputes. The respondents have paid Rs. One lac to the petitioner by demand draft in Court today. The petitioner has stated in the consent terms that she would not make any claim in future arising out of the marriage between her and the 1st respondent. I have ascertained this fact from the petitioner since her divorce proceedings are pending before the Family Court. She has informed the Court that she has no grievance against the respondents, including the 1st respondent, and that she does not wish to proceed with the case filed under Sections 498-A, 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. In this view of the matter, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the prosecution pending as the petitioner has no grievance against the 1st respondent. 4. In the case of B.S.Joshi & ors. v/s State of B.S.Joshi & ors. v/s State of B.S.Joshi & ors. v/s State of Haryana Haryana Haryana & anr. reported in A.I.R. 2003 SC 1386, & anr. reported in A.I.R. 2003 SC 1386, & anr. reported in A.I.R. 2003 SC 1386, the Supreme Court has observed thus - "What would happen to the trial of the case where the wife does not support the imputations made in the F.I.R. of the type in question. As earlier noticed, now she has 3 filed an affidavit that the F.I.R. was registered at her instance due to temperamental differences and implied imputations. There may be many reasons for not supporting the imputations. It may be either for the reason that she has resolved disputes with her husband and his other family members and as a result thereof she has again started living with her husband with whom she earlier had differences or she has willingly parted company and is living happily on her own or has married someone else on earlier marriage having been dissolved by divorce on consent of parties or fails to support the prosecution on some other similar grounds. In such eventuality, there would almost be no chance of conviction. Would it then be proper to decline to exercise power of quashing on the ground that it would be permitting the parties to compound non-compoundable offences. Answer clearly has to be in "negative". It would, however, be a different matter if the High Court on facts declines the prayer for quashing for any valid reasons including lack of bona fides." 4 In the present case, there is no likelihood of the respondents/accused being convicted of the offence under Section 498-A as the petitioner has stated in her petition that she has amicably settled her differences with the respondents. In these circumstances, it would be appropriate to exercise the powers vested in this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. The proceedings in C.C.No.151 of 2007 pending before the J.M.F.C., Thane are quashed. 6. Writ petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.