vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.449 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.449 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.449 OF 2008 Surekha w/o. Pradeep Lale ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.Umesh Mankapure for Applicant Mr.U.B. Nighot for Respondent Nos.2 to 6 Ms.A.A. Mane, APP, for State CORAM: SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. DATED: APRIL 28, 2008 APRIL 28, 2008 APRIL 28, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The applicant was married to one Pradeep Lale, who expired in a road accident in 1998. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are the parents of the deceased. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 are his siblings. Respondent No.6 is the husband of Respondent No.5. 2. The applicant, who is the complainant, had lodged a complaint against Respondent Nos.2 to 6 with Solapur Police Station alleging that Respondent Nos.2 to 6 had committed offences punishable under sections 307, 406, 498A, 468, 323, 504 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case was then transferred to the Mangalvedha Police station. A chargesheet was filed and the trial was committed to the Court of Sessions at Pandharpur and is registered as Sessions Case No.46 of 2002. The main : 2 : contention of the applicant before the Sessions Court was that she had been harassed by her in-laws after the death of her husband Pradeep Lale. 3. By the present application, the applicant complainant has stated that the respondents have settled the disputes with her and in view of her two young children and their future, she has decided that she does not wish to proceed with the complaint filed by her. The complainant is present in Court and she has stated before me that she has no grievance whatsoever against the respondents. 4. In these circumstances, the prosecution which is pending against Respondent Nos.2 to 6 would be futile as in all probability there would be no evidence to prove the offences alleged against the respondents since the applicant has no grievance against them. The proceedings before the Sessions Court, Pandharpur in Sessions Case No.46 of 2002 are therefore quashed and set aside. 5. Criminal Application is allowed and disposed of accordingly.