IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3967 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3967 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3967 OF 2007 Yashpal J. Sharma & ors.... Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra & anr....... Respondent. Ms. Sandhya C. Sharma for the applicant. Mrs. M.H.Mhatre APP for State. Mrs. Shilpa Joshi for Respondent no.2. Ms. Meera Sanzagir for Respondent no.3. CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED; 15TH FEBRUARY, 2008 DATED; 15TH FEBRUARY, 2008 DATED; 15TH FEBRUARY, 2008 P.C.; P.C.; P.C.; 1. At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, petitioner no.3 is permitted to be transposed as respondent no.3. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. 2. The petitioner no.1 is father of petitioner no.2 whereas respondent no.3 is the wife of petitioner no.2. Marriage of the petitioner no.2 and respondent no.3 was solemnised on 7th July 2003 and admittedly both of them are staying separately from 11th July 2003. It is thus clear that the parties have hardly stayed together in the matrimonial wedlock for a period of less than a week. 3. The respondent no.2 is the mother of respondent no.3. The respondent no.2 lodged FIR and on the basis thereof, MIDC police station registered C.R.No. 230/05 under section 498-A and 406 read with 34 of IPC. Thus respondent no.2 being the complainant and mother of respondent no.3, has been impleaded as party to this petition. Respondent no.3 wife had filed petition bearing No.A-109/07 in the Family Court at Bandra for dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce. I am informed that the said petition instituted by respondent no.3 came to be converted into a petition for a decree of divorce by mutual consent under section 13(b) of Hindu Marriage Act. The Family Court had granted divorce in the said petition and consent terms came to be filed, a copy of which is kept on record at Exh.B. The consent terms clearly reveal that the parties have resolved their disputes interse and on the basis of the said compromise, the present application for quashing of the criminal case has been filed. It will not be out of place to mention that the marriage is also dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent by the Family Court and thereafter these proceedings are instituted. The respondent nos.2 and 3 are present in the court along with the advocates. Respondent nos.2 and 3 have categorically stated before me that they do not wish to continue the proceedings against the petitioners initiated under section 498-A, 406 read with 34 of IPC. The respondent nos. 2 and 3 have admitted the consent terms to be true and correct. The respondent nos.2 and 3 joined in the prayer made by the petitioners for quashing of the criminal case. I am of the clear view that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the joint request for quashing of the proceedings, as all the disputes are resolved between the parties consequent upon the filing of consent terms before the Family Court. The learned counsel for the parties placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of B.S.Joshi and B.S.Joshi and B.S.Joshi and another Vs. State of Harayana and another another Vs. State of Harayana and another another Vs. State of Harayana and another to contend that the power of this court for quashing under section 482 is not restricted by section 330 of the Code. In the result the Criminal Application is allowed. The proceedings of Criminal case No.4692/PW/05 in C.R.No.235/05 pending on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate, 22nd Court, at Andheri, Bombay is quashed and set aside. The petition is accordingly disposed of. ....