- 1 - 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 CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2634 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.2634 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.2634 OF 2008 Pradeepsingh Iswarshingh Bajwa & Ors. ...Applicants vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.Sayaji D.Nangre for the Applicants Ms P.P.Shinde A.P.P. for State Mr.Nimish Desai for the Respondent No.2. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : AUGUST 7,2008 : AUGUST 7,2008 : AUGUST 7,2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Rule. Learned A.P.P waives service for the first Respondent. The learned Advocate for the second Respondent waives service. Taken up for hearing forthwith. 2. The prayer in this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (hereinafter referred to as the said Code) is for setting aside the criminal proceedings arising out of F.I.R. registered at the instance of the second Respondent alleging commission of offences under section 498-A Pand section 406 r/w section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The third Applicant and the second Respondent married on 16th April 2003. It appears that there was a dispute between the third Applicant and the second Respondent. The first, third and fourth applicants are the members of the family of the third Applicant. - 2 - 3. Subsequently, there was a settlement between the parties. The consent terms were filed before the family Court on 22nd July 2008 by which the husband and wife agreed to take divorce by mutual consent. Reliance has been placed on consent terms filed before the Family Court. Perusal of the consent terms show that all disputes between the third Applicant and the second Respondent have been amicably resolved. Clause 4 in the consent terms records no objection of the second Respondent for quashing the criminal case. 4. The learned Counsel for the Applicant pointed out that necessary compliance has been made with the terms incorporated in the consent terms by paying and/or depositing the requisite amount. The learned counsel for the second Respondent states that the second Respondent is personally present in the court and she accepts the settlement incorporated in the consent terms filed before the Family Court. He states that the second Respondent who is personally present in the court has no objection for grant of prayer clause (a). I have also heard the learned A.P.P for the first Respondent. 5. Perusal of the F.I.R shows that the matrimonial dispute between the third Applicant and the second Respondent led to filing of F.I.R. The second Respondent states that now there is a complete settlement between the parties. It is pointed - 3 - that the consent terms filed before the Family Court have been acted upon by the third Applicant by making the requisite payment. Now, further continuation of criminal proceeding will cause undue harassment to both the parties and no purpose will be served by continuing the criminal proceeding. Hence, this is a fit case for exercising power under section 482 of the said Code. 6. Hence, rule is made absolute in terms prayer clause (a). 7. Parties and the concerned court to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE