1 cri-wp-3883-11 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3883 OF 2011 Mr. Shashikant Laxman Nimbekar & ors. .. Petitioners Vs. Mrs. Vanita @ Sakshi Shashikant Nimbekar and anr. .. Respondents Mr. Jignesh V. Nishar for petitioners. Ms. M. S. Bane for respondent no.1. Ms. P. P. Shinde, APP for State. CORAM: P. D. KODE,J. DECEMBER 23, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard. 2. Rule. Returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 3. By the present petition the petitioners, who are respectively husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of respondent no.1 have prayed for quashing the prosecution initiated against the petitioners for 2 cri-wp-3883-11 commission of offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, as a result of investigation of the FIR No. 57 of 2010 lodged by respondent no.1 with Navghar Police Station, Thane. i.e. RCC No. 922 of 2010 registered upon charge-sheet filed by said police in the court of JMFC, 9th Court at Thane. The learned counsel for the petitioners urged that respondent no.1 had married with petitioner no.1 on 11/2/2007, but, thereafter, she had hardly stayed for a period of two months with the petitioners and out of them, with petitioner no.1 for one month until he left for Dubai. It is urged that thereafter on 7/5/2010 said FIR was lodged and same has led registration of the aforesaid case. It is submitted that there is no issue from the said marriage. It is urged that the petitioner no.1 had filed thereafter petition for divorce before the Family Court. 4. It is submitted that thereafter due to intervention of the Marriage Counselor, the matter has been amicably settled and accordingly, the petition was converted to the petition for divorce by mutual consent and consent terms has also been filed. It is urged that the petitioners have made necessary compliance as per the terms and conditions mentioned in the said consent terms and an amount of Rs.4,50,000/- has been deposited in the Family Court. The learned counsel for the respondent no.1 has also admitted the aforesaid facts and the fact of matter being amicably settled. The respondent no.1, who is present in the court, has also made a statement of the matter being settled. The learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent no.1 submitted that the offence under Section 498-A being not compoundable, they have been required to file the present petition. It is urged that disputes arisen being of personal nature and same being settled, 3 cri-wp-3883-11 allowing to continue said criminal prosecution would only cause haredship to parties rather than serving any fruitful purpose. It is urged that alleged acts for which case was filed being of personal nature, not allowing to continue same is unlikely to affect interest of society at large or adversely affect public policy. 5. After considering the matters stated in FIR and so also the consent terms referred to hereinabove, there appears substance in the submission of learned counsel for the respondent no.1 so also the learned APP that the allegations upon which the prosecution is founded are not of such a nature for not according prayers made in the petition. 6. Having regard to the aforesaid and considering true import of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as explained by the Hon’ble Apex Court in decision in the case of Majoj Sharma vs. State reported in 2009 ALL MR (Cri) 267 (SC) further clarifying the ratio in earlier decision in the case of B.S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana reported in AIR 2003 SC 1386, it does not appear that allowing the continuation of the criminal proceedings in the court in spite of the parties having arrived at settlement will be an ordeal amounting to the abuse of the process of law. 8. In the premises aforesaid, the prayers in the petition are allowed and FIR bearing No.57 of 2010 for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC registered with Navghar Police Station, Thane and Regular Criminal Case No. 922 of 4 cri-wp-3883-11 2010 arising out of the same and pending before the learned JMFC, 9th Court, Thane are hereby quashed. The bail bonds, if any, entered upon by the petitioners stand cancelled and they are set at liberty. 9. Rule made absolute in the above terms. ( P. D. KODE,J.)