1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1303 OF 2009 Mr.Nilesh Potdar & Ors. : Petitioners V/s. State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents .... Mr.A.J. Khandarkar for the petitioners. Ms Tanuja Potdar, respondent no.2 present in person. .... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : APRIL 06, 2010. P.C.: Not on board. Taken on board. Rule, returnable forthwith. Ms Tanuja Potdar, respondent no.2 who appears in person, waives service. Heard by consent. 2. This petition has been filed for quashing the process issued by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate’s 6th Court, Andheri, in C.R. No.446 of 2007. 3. The aforesaid criminal proceedings were initiated at the instance 2 of the respondent no.2, who is the wife of the petitioner no.1. The proceedings are for offences punishable under section 498-A of the I.P.C. 4. The dispute between the parties pertains to a matrimonial dispute. However, it appears that subsequently the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and the parties have taken divorce by mutual consent. The respondent no.2 is personally present in Court and reiterates the factum regarding amicable settlement. 5. Since the present proceedings arise out of matrimonial dispute between the parties and the parties have amicably settled their disputes, in view of the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386), I do not find that any purpose would be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending. I find that this is a fit case where this Court should exercise jurisdiction under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., and quash the proceedings in the interest of justice. 6. In that view of the matter, rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (A). B. R. GAVAI, J.