MP 1 WP824_11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 824 OF 2011 Mrs. Purvi Mitesh Shah and another ... Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra and another ... Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 880 OF 2011 Mr. Mitesh Kantilal Shah and others ... Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra and another ... Respondents Mr. Mundargi i/b. Ms. K. Rajani for Petitioners in WP 824 of 2011. Mr. Prakash Naik i/b. Mr. Manish Jagani for Petitioners in WP 880 of 2011 and for Respondent in WP 824 of 2011. Mr. Y. M. Nakhawa, APP for the State in WP 824 of 2011. Mr. Kantharia, APP for the State in WP 880 of 2011. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. MONDAY, JUNE 13, 2011 P. C. : Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. Writ Petition No. 824 of 2011 is filed by the petitioner No. 1, who was a daughter-in-law of the respondent No. 2, for quashing and setting aside a criminal case arising out of M.E.C.R. No. 3 of 2010 registered with the Tardeo Police Station. The petitioner No. 2 is father of the petitioner No. 1. The allegation of the complainant in the said case against the present petitioner is regarding extortion. MP 2 WP824_11 3. Criminal Writ Petition No. 880 of 2011 is filed by the petitioner No. 1 who was a husband of the respondent No. 2 and the other petitioners who are the relatives of petitioner No. 1. The petitioners have prayed for quashing and setting aside the Criminal Case No. 260/PW/2010 wherein the complainant has alleged an act attributable to the petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 498-A and other Sections under the Indian Penal Code. 4. Mitesh who is the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 880 of 2011 was married to Purvi who is respondent No. 2 in the said petition. It appears that there were matrimonial disputes, and on account of the said disputes, the aforesaid criminal cases came to be filed. However, the parties have now settled their disputes. The proceedings vide M. J. Petition No. A-177 of 2010 for obtaining decree of divorce by consent was filed before the Family Court, Mumbai. Vide judgment and decree dated 6th December 2010, the marriage between Mitesh and Purvi has been dissolved. The parties have also filed their consent terms in the said proceedings. 5. In the petitions, the petitioners have averred that they have no grievance left against each other. It has been averred that the complaints were filed on account of matrimonial disputes. The Apex Court in the case of B. S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana reported in AIR 2003 SC 1386 has held that this Court should encourage matrimonial settlements by quashing criminal proceedings. In that view of the matter, this is a fit case for exercising inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. MP 3 WP824_11 6. The husband and wife both are present in the Court and they reiterate about the matter being resolved amicably. 7. Rule is, therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) in both the matters. (B. R. GAVAI, J)