Ndm 1 wp.2450.09.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2450 OF 2009 Dr. Praveen Vidyadhar Gokhale and ors. ... PETITIONERS Vs. The State of Maharashtra and anr. ... RESPONDENTS -------------- Mr. N.V. Pradhan, Senior Counsel i/b Ms. S.D. Khot and Ameeta Kuttikrishnan for Petitioners. Mr. Aslam Khan, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Mrs. U.V. Kejriwal, APP for State. -------------- CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATE : 23 rd September, 2009. P.C. 1 By this petition, the petitioners seek quashing of proceedings of a criminal proceeding in C.C. No. 270/PW/2008 pending on file of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 27 th Court, Mulund, Mumbai arising out of Crime No. 87 of 2008 registered at Mulund Police Station on an FIR lodged by the Respondent No.2. Ndm 2 wp.2450.09.sxw 2 The respondent No.2 ( complainant ) is wife of the petitioner No.1. Their matrimonial relationship is now snapped as a result of divorce by mutual consent. The Respondent No.2 filed report with the Mulund Police Station, regarding offences punishable under Section 498- A read with 34 and 406 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner. On the basis of her report, certain investigation was carried out and the charge-sheet was filed, which is registered as a criminal case referred to above. 3 The spouses have settled their matrimonial disputes. The learned counsel for the parties state that the consent terms have been filed in the Family Court at Bandra and the spouses have agreed to abide themselves by the said consent terms. The respondent No.2 has filed affidavit-in-reply whereby she has expressed no objection for quashing of the criminal case in view of the settlement of the matrimonial dispute. Ndm 3 wp.2450.09.sxw 4 Mr. Nitin Pradhan, learned counsel for the petitioners makes a statement that the petitioners would abide themselves by the terms of the settlement, which is arrived at as per the consent terms filed in the Family Court, Bandra in connection with the matrimonial dispute. 5 The settlement of the matrimonial dispute is the cause as to why for criminal prosecution is also sought to be quashed notwithstanding the fact that offence under Section 498-A is not compoundable. 6 The Apex Court in B.S. Joshi and others vs State of Maharashtra and another (2003) 4 Supreme Court Cases 675 held that inherent power under Section 482 may be exercised in appropriate situation and particularly when the matrimonial disputes are resolved on account of amicable settlement. The Apex Court observed that the Court is required to encourage genuine settlement of the matrimonial disputes. Ndm 4 wp.2450.09.sxw 7 Having regard to the legal position mentioned above and the consent terms, which are reflected in the petition as well as in the affidavit in reply, I am of the opinion that the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse the process of the Court. It will meet the end the justice, if the criminal prosecution is quashed so as to bring about harmony in the future relations between the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.2. 8 In the result, the petition is allowed in terms of para No. 12 (a) and the criminal proceedings of C.C. No. 270/PW/2008 are quashed. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR, J ]