7. cr appln 3412-10.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3412 OF 2010 Shailesh Ghewarchand Jain & Ors .. Applicants Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ano. .. Respondents Mr. Eknath Sawant for the Applicants Mrs. Swati C. Narvekar for Respondent No. 2 Mr. J.P. Kharge, APP for the State CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 26th AUGUST, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard learned advocate for the applicants, learned advocate for respondent no. 2 and learned APP for the State. 2. The applicants are seeking quashing of C.R. 108 of 2008 registered with Dadar Police Station. The said case is now pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Dadar, Mumbai and it is numbered as CC 293/PW/08. The FIR has been lodged by respondent no. 2 against the applicants under Sections 498A, 406 read with 34 of I.P.C.. Respondent No. 2 was married to applicant no. 1 and applicant nos. 2 and 3 are father and mother of the applicant no. 1 and 1 7. cr appln 3412-10.doc applicant no. 4 is the brother of applicant no. 1. 3. Mrs. Narvekar appearing for respondent no. 2 has stated that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and the FIR and the proceedings regarding thereto may be quashed. Respondent no.2 has filed an affidavit to the above respect in this Court which is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. 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 notice from a reading of the FIR and the other documents on record that the dispute was purely a personal one between two contesting parties and that it arose out of extensive business dealings between them and that there was absolutely no public policy involved in the nature of the allegations made against the accused. We are, therefore, of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings in the light of the compromise... We need to emphasize that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court 2 7. cr appln 3412-10.doc should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the 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". In the said case, application was filed for quashing of FIR under various sections including 406 of IPC and on account of compromise entered into between the complainant and the accused, the said case came to be quashed. 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 3 7. cr appln 3412-10.doc 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 Ors. 2006 Cri.L.J.4591, it was held that matrimonial offence can be compounded by quashing criminal proceedings in exercise of inherent powers. 7 Thus, in view of the above decisions and keeping in mind the fact that the case pertains to a matrimonial dispute and in view of amicable settlement between the parties, I am inclined to quash the proceedings. 8 In the result, C.R. No. 108 of 2008 registered with Dadar Police Station and proceedings relating thereto i.e. C.C. No. 293/PW/2008 pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 5h Court, Dadar, Mumbai, is quashed. 9 Petition is disposed of. 10. The applicants are on bail. Their bail bonds shall stand cancelled. [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] 4 7. cr appln 3412-10.doc 5