1 17WP.2746-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2746 OF 2011 Shabnam Mastan Sheikh. ..Petitioner. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and 5 others. ..Respondents. .......... Mr. Naveen Chomal, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. P.S. Hingorani, A.P.P. for the State. Respondent No.2 is present in person for himself and on behalf of Respondent Nos. 3 to 6. .......... CORAM : A. M. KHANWILKAR AND P. D. KODE, JJ. DATED : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. Rule, returnable forthwith, by consent. 3. Learned APP waives notice for respondent No.1 – State. 4. The relief claimed in this Petition is for quashing of FIR vide C.R. No.158 of 2006 registered at the instance of the petitioner at Dindoshi Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of Indian Penal Code. It is noticed that the incident in question is PPD 2 17WP.2746-11 essentially pertaining to matrimonial dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.2 who were married on 6th May, 2005. The matrimonial disputes have now been amicably resolved between the parties. The petitioner/wife and respondent No.2/husband have already filed consent terms dated 28.6.2011 before the Family Court at Bandra. As per the arrangement referred to in the said Consent Terms, it is agreed by the petitioner that she will not precipitate the complaint registered by her against the respondent Nos.2 to 6 herein and she will consent for quashing of FIR. The said position is reiterated by the petitioner who is personally present in the Court along with her father. Respondent No.2 is also present in Court. The petitioner submits that she has agreed for the said arrangement with full understanding and without any duress or coercion from any quarter. Learned APP submits that since the offence is not compoundable offence, he may leave it to the Court to consider the request of the private parties. 5. In our considered opinion, since petitioner and respondent No.2 have amicably resolved all their matrimonial issues and have 3 17WP.2746-11 decided to part company of each other and to begin their future career anew, it would be in the interest of justice of all concerned that the relief claimed in this Petition in terms prayer clause 9(B) is granted. The petitioner has no intention of pursuing any criminal action against the respondent Nos.2 to 6. As aforesaid, she has given declaration that she would give consent for quashing of FIR. Besides, the father of the petitioner is also supporting the sand taken by the petitioner. 6. Taking overall view of the matter, in the interest of justice, we allow this Petition in terms of prayer clause 9(B) which reads thus :- “9(B) The criminal proceedings under C.R. No.158/2006, registered with the Dindoshi Police Station, Mumbai U/s. 498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of the I.P.C., pending before the learned 3rd Metropolitan Magistrate, Borivali, Mumbai, bearing C.C. No.1137/PW/ 06, wherein the Petitioner is the informant, may kindly be quashed and the petitioner may kindly be permitted to compound the said matter with the Accused Respondent Nos.2 to 6 i.e. her husband and in-laws;” 7. Ordered accordingly. (P. D. KODE, J.) (A. M. KHANWILKAR, J.)