Ankit Kiran Kumar Jain And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 756 OF 2022 Ankit Kiran Kumar Jain and others ...
Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and another ...
Respondents .........
Mr. Bharat Manghani for the Applicants.
Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP for the State.
Ms. Ranjana Lad alongwith Ms. Pallavi Kothari for Respondent No.2. .........
CORAM :
NITIN JAMDAR AND N.R. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED :
24 AUGUST 2022 P.C. :- .
The present Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is filed to quash the First Information Report No. 451 of 2020 (hereinafter referred to as "FIR", for short) dated 11 November 2020 registered at Byculla Police Station, Mumbai against the Applicants for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2.
The aforesaid FIR came to be registered at the instance of Respondent No.2 who has inter-alia alleged that she was subjected to 1 / 4
mental and physical cruelty at the hands of her husband and in-laws. The Applicant No.1 is the husband of Respondent No.2 and the Applicant Nos.2 and 3 are her mother-in-law and sister-in-law respectively.
3.
The learned Counsel for the Applicants and the Respondent No.2 jointly submit that the parties have amicably settled the dispute. It is submitted that no purpose would be served by keeping the prosecution alive, in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties. The learned Counsel for the parties submit that the present case is squarely covered by the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab1.
4.
The Respondent No.2 has filed consent affidavit dated 24 August 2022. The Respondent No.2 has stated that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.
5.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh (supra) has held :
"But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil flavour stand on a different footing for the purposes of quashing, (2012) 10 SCC 303 2 / 4
particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences 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 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."
6.
We have examined the facts of the present case in the light of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh's case. The main reason for filing of the FIR appears to be matrimonial discord. The allegations are totally of personal in nature. In view of the settlement between the parties, Respondent No.2 is not going to support the prosecution case and therefore, possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. Nothing fruitful will therefore come out of the prosecution in question. Apart from it, if the FIR is not quashed, the settlement arrived at between the parties would be disrupted. Considering these facts and circumstances, the Application deserves to be allowed. Hence, the Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which reads thus:
3 / 4
"a) Quash and set aside the criminal proceedings initiated by the Respondent vide Cr. No.451 of 2020 registered at the Byculla Police Station against the Applicants."
7.
The Criminal Application is disposed of.
( N.R. BORKAR, J. ) ( NITIN JAMDAR, J. ) by KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Date:
2022.09.14 10:59:23 +0530 KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI 4 / 4