Sunit Sanjay Mayekar And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

DAE 72-WP-4984-2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4984 OF 2022 Sunit Sanjay Mayekar And Ors.

...Petitioners

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra And Anr.

...Respondents

Mr. Jitesh Alva Advocate for Petitioners.

Mr. Ajay Patil, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. V. M. Desai Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND PRAKASH D.NAIK, JJ.

by DNYANESHWAR ASHOK ETHAPE Date: 2023.04.15 16:53:53 +0530 DNYANESHWAR ASHOK ETHAPE DATE : 10th APRIL 2023.

P.C.:- 1.

The Petitioners i.e. Petitioner No.1, husband, Petitioner No.2, fatherin-law and Petitioner No.3, mother-in-law of Respondent No.2 have filed present Petition for quashing of C.C. No. PW/331/2021 arising out of C.R. No. 17 of 2021 dated 15th February 2021 registered with Kanjurmarg Police Station, Mumbai, under Section 498(A) read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending on the file of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 53rd Court, Mulund, Mumbai, by consent of Respondent No.2. 2.

Record indicates that, Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.2 have filed '

Consent Terms for Mutual Consent Divorce' dated 2nd August 2022 in Petition No. A-1966 of 2019 before the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai. In paragraph No. (XII) thereof, Respondent No.2 has given her consent for 1/2

DAE 72-WP-4984-2022.doc quashing the said case i.e. C.C. No.PW/331/2021 arising out of C.R. No.17 of 2021, dated 15th February 2021 registered with Kanjurmarg Police Station, Mumbai.

3.

Learned Advocate for Respondent No.2 tendered across the bar an Affidavit dated 21st November 2022 duly affirmed by Respondent No.2 before a Notary Public. In paragraph No. (4) thereof, she has given consent for quashing of C.C. No. PW/331/2021 pending on the file of learned Metropolitan Magistrate 53rd Court, Mulund, Mumbai. Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court and through her Advocate reiterated the contents of Affidavit dated 21st November 2022 and her 'No Objection' for quashing of the present proceedings. 4.

In view thereof, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) (A. S. GADKARI, J.) 2/2