IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2880 OF 2008 Mr.Mohd. Arif Malkani & Anr. .. Applicants Vs. Smt.Anjum Ara Mohd. Arif Malkani & Anr. .. Respondents Mr.M.S.Kadu for the applicants. Smt.Aisha S.A.Quadry for the respondent No.1. Mr.D.R.More, A.P.P for the State. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 08th September 2008. : 08th September 2008. : 08th September 2008. P.C.: . Rule. The learned advocate for 1st respondent waives service. The learned A.P.P waives service for the State of Maharashtra. 2. The prayer in this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is for quashing the criminal proceedings on the basis of F.I.R lodged at the instance of the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent is the wife of the 1st applicant. The 2nd applicant is another wife of the 1st applicant. The marriage between the 1st applicant and the 1st respondent was solemnised on 08th July 2005. The 1st respondent filed the F.I.R in question alleging commission of offence under section : 2 : 498-A read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. There was a petition filed by the 1st respondent in the Family Court against the first applicant. The consent terms were filed in the said petition filed in the Family Court by which the dispute between the applicants and the 1st respondent was settled. Necessary provision was made in the consent terms regarding accommodation to be provided to the 1st respondent and payment of some amount towards household expenses etc. In the consent terms it is provided that after compliance is made with clause (b) of 2nd paragraph of the consent terms, the 1st respondent will take out necessary proceedings for quashing the criminal proceedings. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that now the 1st applicant has complied with clause (b) of paragraph 2 of the consent terms and therefore, the proceedings be quashed. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent states that the said respondent is personally present in the Court. On instructions of the 1st respondent, she states that the 1st applicant has complied with the requirement of clause (b) of paragraph 2 of the consent terms and has abided by the settlement recorded in the consent terms. The 1st respondent has : 3 : no objection if the prayer made in this application is granted. I have also heard the learned A.P.P for the State. 4. It appears that the F.I.R was lodged by the 1st respondent as a result of the matrimonial dispute between the 1st applicant and the 1st respondent. As pointed out by the counsel appearing for the applicants and the 1st respondent, now there is a complete settlement between the parties. Therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings will cause undue harassment to both the parties and the continuation of proceedings will amount to abuse of process of law. In the circumstances, a case is made out for quashing the criminal proceedings. 5. Hence, I pass the following order: (i) Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). (ii) There will be no orders as to costs. : 4 : (A.S.Oka,J)