1` IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 3625/2009 Dilip Ramesh Verma vs. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., PS Sadar, Nagpur and another. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. Mr. R.S.Charpe, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Doifode, APP for non-applicant no.1. None for non-applicant no.2. CORAM : MRS. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 18.2.2011 Heard the learned advocate for the applicant – original accused and learned APP for non-applicant no.1. None appears for non-applicant no.2 though served. 2. The applicant was married to non-applicant no.2 on 24.10.1992. Thereafter, the non-applicant no.2 wife filed First Information Report No. 37/09 at Koradi Police Station, Nagpur against the applicant. The said First Information Report is under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. It is now numbered as Criminal Case No. 182/2001 which is pending on the file of the Judicial 2` Magistrate, First Class, Court No.6, Nagpur. The applicant is seeking quashing of the said criminal case. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that both the applicant as well as non-applicant no.2 herein had filed a Joint Petition under Section 13(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent before the Family Court at Nagpur which was numbered as Petition No. F-26/2006. In the said joint petition it was mentioned that the petitioner no. 1 therein i.e. the present non-applicant no.2 has decided to compound the criminal case under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.6, Nagpur. The non- applicant no.2 wife has also stated in the said petition under section 13(b) that she shall attend the concerned court for necessary actions/ requirements for compounding the above said matter. The said petition also provided that the present applicant shall pay Rs. 1.25 lacs in cash to the respondent wife in lump sum, which amount has been paid to her. The Family Court allowed the petition and a decree of divorce by mutual consent 3` came to be granted by the Family Court. In the Judgment of the Family Court, it is specifically noted that the parties have no allegations against each other and there is nothing to be exchanged between them. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in view of the fact that the wife in the joint petition has clearly stated that she has decided to compound the Criminal Case under section 498 A, hence, in view of the above facts the case be quashed. 4. As stated earlier, though the non-applicant – wife has been served, she is not attending the court. Though in her petition before the Family Court she has stated that she shall attend the concerned court for necessary action/ requirement for compounding the criminal case under section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code. However, now after receiving the entire lump sum payment and also getting divorce as desired by her, she is now not extending her co-operation as promised by her. I have perused the certified copy of the joint petition under section 13(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act as well as the certified copy of the order passed by the Family Court. It is obvious that the non-applicant wife, after receiving all the 4` amount from the husband, is now not willing to come forward before the court and do her part towards quashing the criminal case as was agreed by her in the petition preferred by her before the Family Court which she has solemnly affirmed. 5. In view of the joint petition preferred by the wife before the Family Court and the order of the Family Court, I am of the opinion that, case is made out for quashing of the criminal case. 6. In the result, the application is allowed. The Criminal Case No. 182/2001 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 6th Court, Nagpur is quashed and set aside. JUDGE patle 5`