bsb IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. CRI. CRI. APPLICATION NO. 749 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO. 749 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO. 749 OF 2008 1. Mr.Pradeep Dulalchandra Mandal & ors. ... Applicants v/s 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. Mrs.Sonali Pradeep Mandal ... Respondents Ms.Mallika A. Ingale for the applicants. Smt.A.A.Mane, A.P.P. for the respondent No.1. Mr.Nilesh Bhole for the respondent No.2. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DATED: DATED: 16TH APRIL, 2008 16TH APRIL, 2008 16TH APRIL, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. This application has been filed by the husband of the 2nd respondent and other relatives of the 1st petitioner. The 1st petitioner married the 2nd respondent on 19.6.2005. A complaint was filed by the wife against the petitioners on 15.2.2006 under Section 498-A, 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners were arrested and granted bail by the learned Magistrate. A chargesheet was filed against the petitioners before the J.M.F.C. 11th Court, Thane, in March 2006 vide R.C.C. No.234 of 2006. The petitioner No.1 i.e. husband, filed a divorce petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act on the 2 ground of cruelty against respondent No.2. Consent terms were filed by the parties before the Family Court and the divorce petition was converted into a petition for divorce by mutual consent. A decree of divorce was passed. The parties under these consent terms have put an end to all the disputes between them. 2. The respondent No.2 who is present in Court contends that she has no grievance against the petitioners and that she and petitioner No.1 have decided to go their own separate ways. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that in these circumstances it would be appropriate for this Court to quash the proceedings in R.C.C. No.234 of 2006 pending before the J.M.F.C., 11th Court, Thane, arising out of F.I.R.No.I 51 of 2006. An affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent who is also present in Court contending that she has no grievance against the petitioners. 4. In the case of B.S.Joshi & ors. v/s State of B.S.Joshi & ors. v/s State of B.S.Joshi & ors. v/s State of Haryana Haryana Haryana & anr. reported in A.I.R. 2003 SC 1386, & anr. reported in A.I.R. 2003 SC 1386, & anr. reported in A.I.R. 2003 SC 1386, the Supreme Court has observed thus - "What would happen to the trial of the case 3 where the wife does not support the imputations made in the F.I.R. of the type in question. As earlier noticed, now she has filed an affidavit that the F.I.R. was registered at her instance due to temperamental differences and implied imputations. There may be many reasons for not supporting the imputations. It may be either for the reason that she has resolved disputes with her husband and his other family members and as a result thereof she has again started living with her husband with whom she earlier had differences or she has willingly parted company and is living happily on her own or has married someone else on earlier marriage having been dissolved by divorce on consent of parties or fails to support the prosecution on some other similar grounds. In such eventuality, there would almost be no chance of conviction. Would it then be proper to decline to exercise power of quashing on the ground that it would be permitting the parties to compound non-compoundable offences. Answer clearly has to be in "negative". It would, however, be a different matter if the High Court on facts declines the prayer for 4 quashing for any valid reasons including lack of bona fides." In the present case, there is no likelihood of the petitioners/accused being convicted of the offence under Section 498-A as the respondent No.2 has stated in her affidavit that she has no grievance against the respondents any more. In these circumstances, it would be appropriate to exercise the powers vested in this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. The proceedings in R.C.C.No.234 of 2006 arising out of F.I.R. No.I 51 of 2006 pending before the J.M.F.C., 11th Court, Thane are quashed. 6. The criminal application is allowed and disposed of accordingly.