..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2075 OF 2008 1. Smt.Jaywanti Raghunath More, & 2. Shri Bhargav Raghunath More. ..Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, & 2. Smt.Sadhana Bhargav More. ..Respondents. .... Mr.Santosh Chari, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms.Sunita Sharma, Adv. for respondent No.2. Mrs.A.A.Mane, APP, for the State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 1st December, 2008. DATED : 1st December, 2008. DATED : 1st December, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners - orig.accused Nos.1 & 2, the learned advocate for respondent No.2 - orig.complainant and the learned APP for the State. The complainant is present. 2. Respondent No.2 - orig.complainant is the wife of petitioner No.2 and petitioner No.1 is the mother of petitioner No.2. By judgment and order dated 12th February, 2008, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 15th Court, Mazgaon, Mumbai convicted the petitioners under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code in ..(2).. C.C.No.180/PW/2005. The said case pertains to C.R. No.20 of 2000 of Kalachowki police station, Mumbai. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction, the petitioners preferred Criminal Appeal No.89 of 2008 before the Sessions Court, Sewree, Mumbai. However, during pendency of the said appeal the parties amicably settled the dispute amongst themselves and it is prayed that the proceedings against the petitioners be quashed. 3. The learned Advocate for the complainant states that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and the complainant does not wish to proceed and prosecute the said case and hence, she has prayed that the said case be quashed. 4. The learned Advocate for the respondent No.2 - orig.complainant has stated that even at this stage the criminal proceedings against the petitioners can be quashed. In support of her contention, she has placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Arvind Barsaul (Dr.) and others vs. Arvind Barsaul (Dr.) and others vs. Arvind Barsaul (Dr.) and others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another State of Madhya Pradesh and another State of Madhya Pradesh and another, reported in (2008) 3 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 88 (2008) 3 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 88 (2008) 3 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 88, wherein even after the appellants were convicted under Section ..(3).. 498-A, the proceedings against them came to be quashed on account of amicable settlement between the parties. 5. In view of the above facts, I am inclined to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of the petitioners. Hence, C.R.No.20 of 2000 of Kalachowki police station, Mumbai and the proceedings relating thereto are quashed. 6. Criminal Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)