IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1440 OF 2008 Manoj Amarlal Hinduja & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents Mr.R.D.Suryawanshi for the Petitioners. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, A.P.P for Respondent No.1. Mr.Rahul S. Kate for Respondent No.2. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 17th July 2008. P.C.: . Rule. The learned advocate for the 2nd respondent waives service. The learned A.P.P waives service for the 1st respondent. 2. The 1st petitioner is the husband of the 2nd respondent. They married on 28th June 2002. There was a matrimonial dispute between the 1st petitioner and 2nd respondent which resulted in lodging of F.I.R by the 2nd respondent alleging commission of offences under section 498-A, 406 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners. It appears that the F.I.R was lodged during the pendency of a petition for divorce : 2 : filed by the 1st petitioner in Family Court at Bandra. Subsequently, there was a settlement between the parties and by consent, the petition filed by the 1st petitioner for divorce was converted into a petition under section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The learned Judge of the Family Court passed a decree on 28th April 2008 dissolving the marriage by mutual consent. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, now the 2nd respondent is no longer interested in prosecuting the petitioners. The advocate for 2nd respondent stated that the 2nd respondent is personally present in the Court. He has tendered on record an affidavit of the 2nd respondent. The said affidavit is marked "X" for identification. Paragraph No.3 of the said affidavit reads thus: "3. I say that in the Marriage Petition, we filed Consent Terms and settled the matter, disputes and differences between the petitioners and I on the terms arrived therein. The said consent terms are annexed at Exhibit B to the petition. I say that the said consent terms are duly signed by me and petitioner No.1 herein and I admit contents of the same. I say that on the basis of Consent Terms Family Court dissolved : 3 : our marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. I say that as per clause No.(2) and (5) of the said consent terms I and petitioner No.1 agreed to jointly approach this Hon’ble Court for quashing of the aforesaid criminal case." 3. The learned advocate for the 2nd respondent states that the 2nd respondent who is personally present in the Court re-affirms the correctness of what she has stated in paragraph No.3 of her affidavit. 4. In view of the amicable settlement in matrimonial dispute, no purpose will be served by continuing prosecution of the petitioners. This is a fit case for exercising power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing proceedings of the criminal case. Accordingly, Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Parties and the concerned Court to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. (A.S.Oka,J)