- 1 - 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 CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1340 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.1340 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.1340 OF 2008 Rahul Jayant Abhyankar & Ors. ...Petitioners vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.S.R.Ganbavale for the petitioners Mr.J.P.Yagnik A.P.P. for State Respondent Nos.2 and 3 appear in person CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : AUGUST 13,2008 : AUGUST 13,2008 : AUGUST 13,2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. I have heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners and second and third respondents appearing in person. By this petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 the petitioners have applied for quashing the criminal proceedings on the basis of F.I.R lodged by the second respondent. 2. The first petitioner is the son of second and third petitioners. The first petitioner married to the third respondent on 20th August 2000. The second respondent is the father of the third respondent. On 15th April 2006, the second respondent lodged F.I.R. alleging commission of offence under section 498-A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal code against the petitioners. On 18th January 2008, there was a settlement between the first petitioner and the - 2 - third respondent. The settlement was filed in the form of consent terms in the pending the petition before the Family Court at Pune. As per the consent terms, the first petitioner and the third respondent agreed to take divorce by mutual consent. A copy of the consent terms filed in the family court has been annexed to this petition. As per the settlement arrived at between the parties, the third respondent agreed that she along with her father will not press the criminal proceeding on the basis of F.I.R. lodged by the second respondent. 3. When this petition appeared before this court on 21st July 2008, the same was adjourned to ensure that compliance is made by the first petitioner with the consent terms. On 4th August 2008 when this petition appeared before this court, an affidavit cum undertaking was filed by the first petitioner stating that he will remain present before the Family Court on 11th August 2008 and he will not withdraw the consent given by him for obtaining divorce by mutual consent under section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955. When the matter is called out today, the learned Advocate for the petitioner as well as the respondent Nos.2 and 3 appearing in person stated that on 11th August 2008, when the matter was called out before the Family Court, the first Petitioner appeared and has recorded his consent for grant of divorce by mutual consent. - 3 - 4. Perusal of the F.I.R lodged by the second respondent shows that it was an outcome of a matrimonial dispute between the first Petitioner and the third Respondent. The consent terms filed before the Family Court show that now there is a complete settlement between the first Petitioner and the third Respondent on all subsisting disputes. The consent terms have been acted upon by the parties as narrated above. As a part of compromise, the respondent nos.2 and 3 agreed not to prosecute the criminal proceeding. 5. In view of the settlement, no purpose will be served by continuing the criminal proceeding. Apart from the fact that the chances of conviction are very bleak, the continuation of criminal proceeding will cause undue harassment to the parties concerned. 6. In the circumstances, a case is made out for invoking power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 for quashing the proceeding. Accordingly, petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). There will be no order as to costs. 7. Parties and the concerned court to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. - 4 - JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE