1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.406 OF 2010 Mr.Deepak Bhaskar Mhalas : Petitioner V/s. Mrs.Neelam Deepak Mhalas & Anr. : Respondents ... Mr.Ujwal Agamdsurve for the petitioner. Mr.Sachin J. Kadam for respondent no.1. Ms A.T.Jhaveri, Addl. Public Prosecutor for resp. no.2. .... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 22, 2010. P.C.: Rule, returnable forthwith. The learned counsel for the respective respondents waive service. Heard by consent. 2. This petition has been filed for quashing the criminal proceedings initiated by C.R.No.254/2007 and numbered as 360/PW/2007 before the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court, Dadar. 3. It appears that there is a matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and the respondent no.1. It further appears that on account of 2 matrimonial discord, the respondent no.1 has initiated criminal proceedings. 4. Now it appears that the matrimonial dispute between the parties has been amicably settled. The parties have filed Consent Terms in M.J. Petition no.F/1153 of 2009 for dissolution of their marriage by consent. In the said Consent Terms, the respondent no.1 has also agreed to withdraw all allegations against the petitioner. A copy of the said consent terms is taken on record and marked exh.`X’ for identification. 5. The parties are personally present in Court. The respondent-wife states that she has no grievance as against the petitioner and that she does not wish to continue with the criminal proceedings initiated by her against the petitioner. 6. Since the present proceedings arise out of matrimonial dispute between the parties and the parties have amicably settled their disputes, in view of the judgement of the Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (AIR 2003 SC 1386), I do not find that any purpose would be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending. I find that this is a fit case where this Court should exercise jurisdiction under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., and quash the proceedings in the interest of justice. 3 7. Accordingly, rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (A). B. R. GAVAI, J.