1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2092 OF 2009 Anjali Vivek Hira ...... Petitioner. V/s State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...... Respondents. Mr. R. Ramamurthy with Mr. Saikumar Ramamurthy for the petitioner. Mr. Asif Patel & Mr. Irshad I. Patel & Mr. Sandeep Bone for respondent No.2. CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATE : 22nd March, 2010 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel for respondent No.2. 2. Both parities i.e the Petitioner and Respondent No.2 are present in Court. 3. By this Petition, Petitioner is seeking an order from this court quashing the FIR which is registered with Chaturshringi Police Station, Pune vide C.R. No.9 of 2007 dated 04/01/2007. Petitioner is the wife of Respondent No.2 and 2 they were married on 14/12/2005 according to Hindu Vedic Rites. However, after July 2006, differences arose between the parties and they started residing separately. Respondent No.2 filed a Divorce Petition against the Petitioner herein in the Court of Additional District Judge at New Delhi. Respondent No.2 also filed a complaint with the Court of Judicial Magistrate 9th Court, Pune being Complaint Case No. 370 of 2007. An application, thereafter, has been filed in the District Court at New Delhi under section 13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act and in the Consent Terms which were filed alongwith the said application, it was agreed by both parties to withdraw all cases pending between them. In clause 9 of the said Consent Terms, it was agreed that the Petitioner would file Petition before the Bombay High Court for quashing/compounding charge-sheet arising out of the FIR No. 9 of 2007 dated 4/1/2007 registered at Chaturghringi Police Station, Pune. 4. Thereafter, the Additional District Judge at New Delhi on 5/2/2009 passed a preliminary order allowing the said Petition filed under section 13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act and has given time to parties to comply with the Consent Terms which were filed. 5. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner has invited my attention to the order passed by the District Court at New Delhi dated 05/02/2009. Petitioner, therefore, has filed this Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of 3 India read with section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for quashing the FIR being C.R. No.9 of 2007 dated 04/01/2007. 6. In my view, prima facie case is made out by the Petitioner for quashing the said complaint. The Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another1 has now held that the powers of the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India are not curtailed by virtue of provisions of section 320 of the Criminal Procedure Code and, in a given case, High Court can exercise its jurisdiction under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the complaint, if both the parties have filed Consent Terms. 7. In the present case, Petition for divorce by mutual consent has been filed by both parties. The said Petition has been allowed. Further, orders have been passed under section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act. There is a specific clause in the said Consent Terms and it is agreed by both parties that before final orders are passed in the Petition for divorce by mutual consent, all cases which are pending against each other should be withdrawn. 8. I am satisfied that the parties wish to abide by the said Consent Terms and would like to start their life afresh in peace by withdrawing all allegations against each other. Therefore, the ratio of the judgment in B.S. Joshi’s case (supra) would 1 AIR 2003 SC 1386 4 squarely apply to the facts of the present case. Respondent No.2 also has filed an affidavit dated 22/3/2010 in which he has reiterated the facts which are stated in the Petition herein. 9. Accordingly, Petition is allowed. The FIR being C.R. No.9 of 2007 dated 4/1/2007 registered with the Chaturshringi Police Station, Pune is quashed and set aside. Similarly, the Private Complaint No. 370 of 2007 pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, 9th Court under sections 406 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code is also quashed and set aside. In view of this order the Criminal Revision Application No. 329 of 2007 pending before the District Judge-3, Pune does not survive and the same is accordingly disposed of. 10. Writ Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 11. Parties to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the registry. (V.M. KANADE, J.)