1 WP 546.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.546 OF 2010 Rupali Ankit Shah & Anr. .. Petitioners. Vs. Ankit Harin Shah & Anr. .. Respondents. Mr.S.V.Marne for the petitioners. Mr.Amol Patankar for respondent no.1. Mrs.M.R.Tidake APP for the State. CORAM : N.D.DESHPANDE, J. DATED : JANUARY 20, 2011. PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for both the sides and learned APP for the State. 2. This writ petition is mainly filed for quashing criminal complaint no.1005/SS/08 pending on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate, 27th Court, Mulund which is the complaint case filed by respondent no.1 for defamation punishable under section 499, 500 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Respondent no.1 is husband of petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 is her mother. Both the petitioners are resident of Pune and are being prosecuted in the aforesaid criminal case. S 2 WP 546.10 The main grievance of the petitioners is that respondent no.1 filed this complaint without any reasonable and probable cause and with ill intention and it is malicious prosecution. 4. It is seen that there are several proceedings pending between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.1 including the petition for divorce which is now transferred to Pune from Mumbai. Petitioner no.1 – wife has also filed a petition for maintenance and the same has been granted to her. 5. The marriage took place in the year 1997. They both were living together till 2002 and a child was born in the year 1999 out of the wedlock. Thereafter, in the year 2002 the petitioner- wife left matrimonial house and started residing with her mother at Pune. Therefore, respondent no.1 filed petition for divorce. The relations between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.1 became strained. 6. The present proceedings in question, according to the petitioner, appears to be one such proceedings initiated by respondent no.1 for harassment. Respondent no.1 also complained of harassment done to him by the wife. In the light of averments made in the petition and cross complaint cases pending between the parties it is difficult to appreciate veracity and credibility of the complaint. Moreover, the dispute between the parties would not come to an end merely by quashing the 3 WP 546.10 present proceedings. However, the aggrieved party is entitled for other reliefs while defending the case such as exemption from giving personal attendance and, therefore, liberty is granted to the petitioner to raise all the grounds stating their innocense and for exemtpion before appropriate forum by separate application, which would be heard by the trial Court and decide in accordance with law. Since the remedy in writ petition and also under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are discretionary and, therefore, for quashing of this petition, I am not inclined to favour the petitioners. No case is made out. The petition stands disposed of with no orders as to costs. (N.D.Desphande, J.)