1 apl.448.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Application No. 448 of 2011 Mr. Ganesh Sahdev Hadvale & ors. ....Applicants v/s. Supriya Ganesh Hadvale & anr. ....Respondents Mr. Hemant Saorde for the applicants. Mr. Rahul A. Hande for respondent no. 1. Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa-APP for the State. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI, J. 20th June, 2011 PC: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing the criminal case no. 837/2009 filed by the respondent no. 1 for the offence punishable under section 498(A), 406, 323 r/w 34 of IPC. The respondent no. 1 is wife of the petitioner no. 1. The rest of the petitioners are relatives of the petitioner no.1. It appears that there was matrimonial dispute in the respondent no.1 and the petitioner no. 1. The complaint came to be filed out of the said dispute. Now the matrimonial dispute has been resolved between the parties. The parties have decided to seek divorce by mutual consent. The affidavit in reply 2 apl.448.11.sxw is filed on behalf of respondent no. 1 reiterating the same. The respondent no. 1 is personally present in the Court and she reiterates that matter has been amicably settled between them and that she does not wish to prosecute the complaint. 3. It can, therefore, be seen that the parties have settled their matrimonial dispute. It can further be seen that the parties have agreed to give an end to the criminal litigations pending between them. 4. The Apex Court in the case of B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 has held that this Court should encourage settlement of matrimonial disputes by exercising extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the criminal proceedings under Section 498(A) of the IPC. 5. In that view of the matter, rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). (B.R. GAVAI, J)