IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 118 OF 2008 Maghsham Sabaji Dhawooskar ...... ......Applicant V/s State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...... ...Respondents. Mr.A.S.Khandeparkar i/by Ms.Shilpa A. Joshi, Adv. For the applicant. Mr.P.A.Pol, APP for the State. Mr.D.Brijesh i/by Mr.Datta Pawar, Adv. For the respondent No.2. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 18/2/08 PC: Heard. The petitioner and respondent No.2 were married on 18.2.1990. In the year 2000 as the relations of the parties were strained, the petitioner filed a petition for a decree of divorce. Respondent No.2 filed an application for interim maintenance so also maintenance for the children. The Family Court granted maintenance of Rs.500/- to the respondent No.2 and Rs.500/- to each of the children. During pendency of the divorce petition the respondent No.2 filed FIR No.20/06 pursuant to which criminal case bearing No.243/P/2006 was filed which is pending on the file of 32nd Court, Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra. The case has been registered for the commission of offences punishable under sections 324 IPC and section 37(1) and 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The 1 parties thereafter have resolved the dispute by filing consent terms before the family court. Acting on the consent terms family court has already passed decree of divorce dissolving the marriage. One of the terms of the consent terms is that the respondent No.2 shall not proceed with the criminal case referred to herein above. It is further agreed between the parties that the respondent shall cooperate for quashing of the said proceedings. An amount of permanent alimony has been deposited in the family court out of which Rs.50000/- are permitted to be withdrawn by respondent No.2 immediately and the balance amount has been permitted to be withdrawn by the respondent No.2 only after quashing of the criminal proceedings. Out of the marital wedlock three children are born to the parties. As per the agreement eldest daughter is to stay with the father whereas younger two children viz. son and the daughter would be staying with the mother. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on a judgment reported in the case of B.S.Joshi & Ors. V/s State of Haryana & Anr., (2003) 4 SCC 675. The respondent No.2 is present in the Court and is represented by counsel. Counsel for respondent No.2 joins in the request made by learned counsel for the applicant for quashing of the proceedings as in his submission it would be in the interest of justice and would result in peaceful separation. The applicant so also respondent No.2 are present i the Court and they confirm the consent terms to be true and correct. The respondent No.2 has specifically stated that she is not interested in prosecution of the petitioner/original accused. I am of the clear view that in the facts and circumstances 2 of the present case it would be in the interest of both the parties if proceedings are quashed. In the result allowing the application I quash and set aside the proceedings in criminal case No.243/P/06 pending on the file of 32nd Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra. Application stands disposed of. 18.2.08 3