IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1917 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1917 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1917 OF 2007 Amarjit Singh S.Mehta & ors.... Applicant versus Nidhi A.S.Mehta & ors....... Respondent. Mr.M.M.Merchant for the applicant Mr. Y.M.Nakhawa APP for State. Mr. Anilkumar Patil for respondent no.1. CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. CORAM; A.P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED; 11TH MARCH, 2008 DATED; 11TH MARCH, 2008 DATED; 11TH MARCH, 2008 P.C.; P.C.; P.C.; 1. This is a Criminal Application for quashing of the FIR No. 595/06 of Oshiwara Police station, Mumbai by the respondent no.1 against the present applicants. The applicant no.1 and the respondent no.1 are husband and wife, their marriage having been solemnised on 26-1-2006. The applicant no.2 is the mother of applicant no.1, whereas the applicant no.3 is brother-in-law and applicant no.4 is sister of the applicant no.1. The parties are staying separately since September 2006. The FIR in question came to be lodged on 26-11-2006. On 15-5-2007 a petition for seeking divorce came to be filed by the applicant no.1 and respondent no.1 in the Family Court, by mutual consent. Perusal of para 13 of the Marriage Petition reveals that the wife has withdrawn the allegations made by her in the FIR. It is a common ground that the date on which the divorce petition by mutual consent was filed, the wife wrote a letter to the Senior Police Inspector intimating him that the respondent no.1 does not wish to proceed with the complaint against the applicants. The Family court desolved the marriage by a decree of divorce on 19-12-2007. An amount of Rs.1,50,000/- has been deposited by applicant no.1 husband in the Family Court towards the alimony over and above the sum of Rs.2,50,000/- which has been already paid earlier. The said sum of Rs.1,50,000/- can be withdrawn by the wife only after quashing of the FIR. The respondent no.1 is present in the court and is represented by advocate. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 submits that quashing of the FIR would be in the interest of justice in as much as the wife would be then entitled to withdraw the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- deposited by the husband in the Family Court. It is submitted by both the advocates appearing for the applicants and the respondents that it would be in furtherance of cause of justice to quash the FIR as the dispute between the parties are resolved amicably out of the court. The learned cousel for the applicant also informed that the applicant has filed a Contempt Petition bearing St. no. 3007/08 and applicant would not press this Contempt Petition and would seek withdrawal thereof. Having regard to the facts narrated hreinabove, I am of the clear view that quashing of the FIR would be in the interest of justice and as the parties have resolved the dispute amicably, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings. In the result I quash and set aside FIR No.595/06 registred with Oshiwara police station, Bombay by the respondent no.1 against the applicants/accused nos.1 to 4. Rule made absolute in the abvove terms. ....