1 Cri.Appln.No.4672/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4672 OF 2010 Manisha w/o Shankar Rathod , Age 30 years, Occ. Household, R/o At present C/o Mansing s/o Phulsing Pawar, Panchsheel Nagar, Beed, District Beed. ... APPLICANT VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through Police Station Officer, Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Nanded (Copy to be served on Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad) 2. Ku. Snehal @ Alankrit d/o Shankar Rathod, Age 10 years, Occ. Education, R/o C/o Shankar s/o Sundersing Rathod, Police Constable, Bakkal No.555, Nanded City Traffic Police, Vazirabad, Nanded. 3. Shankar s/o Sundersing Rathod, Age major, Occ. Police Constable, R/o Police Constable at Police Station, Mahur, District Nanded. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri A.A. Mukhedkar, Advocate for applicant Mrs. R.K. Ladda, A.P.P. for respondent No.1. Shri U.B. Bondar, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 & 3 ..... 2 Cri.Appln.No.4672/2010 CORAM : U.D. SALVI, J. DATED : 20th December, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard. Perused. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by mutual consent of parties. 2. Worth of the F.I.R. bearing C.R. No.181/2010, dated 25.10.2010, registered under Sections 420, 468, 471, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, at Shivajinagar Police Station at Nanded against the applicant is in question in the present petition. 3. Perusal of the copy of the F.I.R. at Exhibit A-3 reveals that the crime was registered upon a letter dated 15.10.2010, purportedly signed by respondent No.2 Snehal Shankar Rathod, daughter of the applicant. The respondent No.2, from the letter dated 15.10.2010 appears to be minor, residing with her father, the respondent No.3 Police Constable Shankar Sundersing Rathod. Tenor of the letter dated 15.10.2010 reveals that, it has been made a medium to vent the respondent No.3 Shankar Sundersing Rathod’s strife against the applicant Manisha Shankar Rathod. A issue of entering a birth date in the school record is being used as a weapon to blame the applicant Manisha Shankar Rathod, wife of respondent No.3 and mother of respondent No.2. 3 Cri.Appln.No.4672/2010 4. Respondent No.2 is present before the Court in response to the order dated 21.11.2011, passed by this Court. She submits that, she has least interest in being used in the fight between her parents and would like to be with her mother without any ill-feelings or mis-givings and for that purpose, she is not interested in pursuing the said complaint any further. She asserted that she would be happy if the said complaint dated 15.10.2010 is quashed. 5. Obviously, the accusations made are the result of the strife between the parents of respondent No.2. In the interest of justice, therefore, the petition is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (C) and F.I.R. Bearing C.R. No.181/2010 dated 25.10.2010, registered under Sections 420, 468, 471, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, at Shivajinagar Police Station at Nanded against the applicant is quashed. 6. At this stage, respondent No.2 Snehal expresses that she wants to be with her mother i.e. the applicant and her younger sister Harlin. Respondent No.3 Shankar Sundersing Rathod makes a statement that he is ready and willing to hand over the custody of respondent No.2 Snehal to the applicant Manisha Shankar Rathod. The applicant Manisha Shankar Rathod accepts her custody. The applicant, however, submits that, liberty be granted to ask for the 4 Cri.Appln.No.4672/2010 maintenance of herself and her two daughters, the respondent No.2 Snehal and Harlin. Liberty is granted as is available in law. ( U.D. SALVI, J. )