1 apl.572.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Application No. 572 of 2011 Husein Heptulla Mamujee & ors. ...Applicants v/s. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents Mr. Rishi Bhuta for the applicants. Mr. A.S. Shitole-APP for the State. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI, J. 29th June, 2011 PC: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioner is praying for quashing C.R. No. 216/2011 registered with Amboli police station. The petitioner and respondent no.3 were married to each other. It appears that there was a matrimonial dispute between the parties. An FIR in question came to be filed at the instance of respondent no.3 for the offence punishable under Section 498 (A) of the IPC alleging therein that ill treatment was meted out to the respondent no.3 by the petitioners. 3. The parties have now amicably settled the matter. They have agreed for divorce as per the Sheriyat laws. The consent terms are also executed between the parties. The same are taken on record and marked X for identification. The respondent no.3-complainant is personally present in the Court and 2 apl.572.11.sxw reiterates as to what has been stated in the consent terms and further states that she does not wish to proceed with the criminal proceedings. 4. It can, therefore, be seen that the parties have settled their matrimonial dispute. It can further be seen that the parties have agreed to give an end to the criminal litigations pending between them. 5. The Apex Court in the case of B.S.Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 has held that this Court should encourage settlement of matrimonial disputes by exercising extraordinary powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the criminal proceedings under Section 498(A) of the IPC. 6. In that view of the matter, rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (d). 7. Certified Copy expedited. (B.R. GAVAI, J)