1 144.11-wp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 144 OF 2011 Manmeetsingh Amar Jeetsingh Kohli and other. ... Petitioners. V/s. State of Maharashtra and another. ... Respondents. Ms.Jyoti Pandey for the petitioners. Mrs.M.R.Tidke, APP for the State. Mrs.Jyoti G. Ratanpal for respondent No.2. CORAM: B.R.GAVAI, J. DATED : 25th July 2011. P.C. : Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioners are praying for quashing of complaint bearing No.61/2003 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nasik. 3. The petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 were married to each other. However, there was a matrimonial discord and, as such, the aforesaid complaint came to be filed for the offence punishable under section 498-A of I.P.C. 2 144.11-wp 4. Now, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. The parties have obtained divorce by mutual consent. The petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 are personally present in the Court and reiterate the fact of settlement. Respondent No.2 has also filed affidavit contending the same. 5. An undertaking has been filed by the petitioner No.1 stating that he has no objection for return of the gold jewellery consisting of gold locket and gold ring to respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 has also filed undertaking stating that she has no objection for return of two pairs of gold earrings to petitioner No.1. The said undertakings are taken on record and marked `X’ and `X-1’ respectively for identification. 6. It can, therefore, be seen that the parties have settled their matrimonial dispute. It can further be seen that the parties have agreed to give an end to the criminal litigations pending between them. 7. The Apex Court in the case of B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 has held that this Court should encourage settlement of matrimonial disputes by exercising extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the criminal proceedings under Section 498 A of the IPC. 8. In the result, rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). 7. The learned trial Court is directed to return one gold locket and one gold ring to respondent No.2 and two pairs of earrings to petitioner No.1. (B.R.GAVAI, J.)