Imran Mohammed Shaikh v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

1/5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 452 OF 2021 Imran Mohammed Shaikh ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

...Respondents

...

Ms. Nidhi G. Dotiya for applicants.

Mr. Deepak Thakre, PP a/w. Mr. S.R. Shinde, APP for State. Mr. Arif Bhati for Respondent No. 2.

Respondent No. 2 is present through video conferencing. ...

CORAM : S. S. SHINDE & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ.

DATE : 10th JUNE, 2021.

P.C.:

1.

This application is filed with following substantive prayer:- a.

that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the FIR vide C.R. no.

352 of 2020 registered with Santacruz Police Station for alleged offences punishable under section 509 of Indian Penal Code and section 4 of THE MUSLIM WOMEN (PROTECTION OF RIGHTS ON MARRIAGE) ACT, 2019 filed at the instance of Respondent No. 2 on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstances of the case.

2/5 2.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Respondent No. 2 jointly submit that the parties have amicably settled the dispute and to that effect Respondent No. 2 has filed the affidavit. Therefore, it is jointly submitted that on the basis of amicable settlement the prayer of applicant to quash the impugned FIR may be favorably considered.

3.

The relevant paragraphs of affidavit filed by Respondent No. 2 read as under:- 1.

I say that upon my complaint, C.R.

No. 352/2020 came to be registered by Santacruz Police Station against my husband i.e. the Applicant herein, and same is outcome of matrimonial dispute between Applicant and Respondent No.

2.

2.

I say that dispute between us is amicably settled and accordingly consent terms are filed before Hon'ble Family Court Mumbai in Petition No. D-92 of 2018. I crave leave to refer and rely upon copy of consent terms as and when produced.

3.

In view of consent terms, I hereby give my consent/no objection for quashing C.R. No. 352/2020 registered with Santacruz Police Station.

4.

I say that the present affidavit is executed without any force or coercion and I have no objection if the present C.R. 352/2020 which is lodge upon any complaint is quashed and set aside.

3/5 5.

I say that disputes between us is amicably settled and therefore I do not wish to prosecute case against the present Applicant or pursue any legal proceedings against the Applicant in the subject matter.

6.

I say that disputes giving rise to the present complaint is private in nature which is established that no purpose will be served to conduct the trial.

7.

I say that the present affidavit is executed for better and effectual quash/ withdraw/NOC to set a-side C.R. No.

352/2020 registered at Santacruz Police Station.

4.

Respondent No. 2 is present. We have interacted with her through video conferencing. She stated that it is her voluntary act without any coercion to enter into the amicable settlement and join the prayer of applicant to quash the impugned FIR. 5.

Since parties have amicably settled the dispute and to that effect consent terms so also affidavit of Respondent No. 2 is placed on record and the 2nd respondent herself stated that it is her voluntary act to enter into such settlement, no fruitful purpose would be served by continuing the investigation in C.R. No. 352 of 2020 registered with Santacruz Police Station.

4/5 6.

Upon perusal of affidavit filed by the complainant and on interaction with her, it is abundantly clear that she is not going to support the allegations in the FIR and further continuation of investigation in C.R. No. 352 of 2020 registered with Santacruz Police Station, would be an exercise in futility. 7.

The Supreme Court in the case of Giansingh v. State of Punjab and Another1 has held that, the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil flavour stand on a different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offence arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and the victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. It is further held that, as inherent power is of wide 2012 (10) SCC 303

5/5 plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz.: (I) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court.

8.

In the light of discussion in forgoing paragraphs, to secure the ends of justice and prevent the abuse of the process of the Court and keeping in view the consent terms so also affidavit filed by the complainant and interaction with 2nd respondent, wherein she stated that it is her voluntary act to enter into the settlement, the application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). The application stands disposed of.

(N.J. JAMADAR, J.) (S. S. SHINDE, J.)