mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4653 OF 2009 Rajesh Nanik Jiandani & ors. ... Applicants versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr ... Respondents ... Mrs.Sonal Parab i/b M/s.Rajeev Savant & Associates for the applicant. Mr.Geeta Jiandani respondent no.2 present in person. Mr.S.N. Gawade APP for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 12th November 2009 P.C. 1. Admit. By consent, taken up for hearing forthwith. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the respondent no.1 State. Respondent no.2 is personally present in the court. She is identified by the counsel for the applicant. Respondent no.2 also has produced for my inspection an identity card issued by Life Insurance Corporation of India which is returned to her after inspection. 3. This petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of the proceedings initiated against them in pursuance of an FIR dated 2nd June 2009 filed against them by the respondent no.2 for the offence punishable u/s.498A, 406 r/w sec.34 of the IPC. Counsel for the applicant states that the matter has been settled between the parties and in Anticipatory Bail Application no.718 of 2009, settlement terms were filed in the court. A copy of the settlement terms is annexed to the petition at Exhibit-3. Respondent no.2 who is present confirms that the matter has been settled and states that she wants to withdraw the complaint/FIR filed before the police in view of the settlement. She has also filed an affidavit sworn on 12th November 2009. In the affidavit, she has stated that she is not willing to proceed with the complaint made by her in Versova police station as the matter has been settled. 4. In B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana & Anr. 2003 4 SCC 675, the Supreme Court has held that even in respect of cases involving in non compoundable offence, it is possible for the court to quash the FIR and/or the criminal proceedings. Following the decision in B.S. Joshi (supra), a Divsion Bench of this court in Mr.Biswaroop Ghosh & Ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. (Criminal Writ Petition no.2227 of 2007 decided on 3rd April 2008) has held that proceedings u/s.498 can be compounded by the Court and proceedings can be quashed by exercise of inherent powers u/s.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. In view of the settlement between the parties, in my view, it would be appropriate to quash the FIR and the proceedings if any, taken in pursuance thereof. For these reasons, application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). (D.G. KARNIK,J.)