1 cr-apl-4069-10 jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.APPLIN. NO. 4069 OF 2010 Sayed Mohd. Abbas Rizvi ..Applicant Vs. Sayed Tanveer Fatima and & Anr. ..Respondents .... Smt. Deepa Matwankar i/b Mr. S.D.Patil Adv. for Applicant Mr. S.A.Shaikh APP for State .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. DATE : SEPT. 13, 2010 P.C.: 1 Leave to amend granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. 2 Heard the learned advocate for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. The applicant is praying for quashing of CR No. 249 of 2009 lodged by him at J.J.Marg Police Station. 3 The respondent no.1 was married to the applicant. Respondent nos.2 and 3 are the brothers of respondent no.1. A 2 cr-apl-4069-10 matrimonial dispute arose between the respondent no.1 on one side and the applicant and his family on the other side. Hence, FIR No. 51 of 2008 came to be lodged by respondent no.1 against the applicant and his family members at Kurla Police Station, Mumbai. The said FIR was under Sections 498-A, 406 r.w. 34 of the IPC. The applicant lodged FIR No.249 of 2009 at J.J.Marg Police Station under Sections 323, 324, 504 r.w. 34 of IPC against respondents 1 to 3. By order dated 31.8.2010 on an application by respondent no.1, the FIR filed by her i.e. FIR NO. 51 of 2008 came to be quashed as the parties had amicably settled the dispute amongst themselves. Now the applicant-original first informant in FIR No. 249 of 2009 of J.J.Marg Police Station has approached this Court for quashing of the FIR lodged by him against his wife and her brothers on the ground that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties. 4 In a decision of the Supreme Court in case of Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 2008 SC 1969, it is observed as follows: "We need to emphasize that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the 3 cr-apl-4069-10 matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly ovberburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilized in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law". 5 In a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Ors. reported in 1977 Cr.L.J. 1125 the Supreme Court referred to Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and observed that in exercise of the wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court or that the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed. The Supreme Court further observed that this power is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. 6 In a decision of this Court in Kiran Tulshiram Ingale Vs. Smt. Anupama P. Gaikwad and others, 2006 Cri.L.J. 459, it was held that in a 4 cr-apl-4069-10 case of matrimonial offence, if there is an amicable settlement criminal proceedings can be quashed by the High Court, in exercise of inherent powers. 7 Thus, in view of the above decisions and in view of amicable settlement between the parties, I am inclined to quash the proceedings. 8 FIR No. 249 of 2009 of J.J.Marg Police Station Mumbai, is quashed. 9 Application is disposed of. [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]