Vinod Rajshekhar Medar And ORS. v. Shilpa Vinod Medar And ANR.

2023:BHC-AS:29629-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2911 OF 2023 1.

Vinod R. Medar 2.

Rajshekhar K. Medar 3.

Laxmi R. Medar

...Petitioners

Versus

1.

Shilpa V. Medar 2.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondents

Mr. Girish Kulkarni, Sr. Advocate a/w. Mr. Darshan Juikar and Mr.Omkar Ghag for the Petitioners.

Mr. Jigar Agarwal a/w. Mr. Niranjan Kandyala for Respondent No.1.

Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for the Respondent No.2.

CORAM

:

NITIN W. SAMBRE & N. R. BORKAR, JJ.

DATE :

6 OCTOBER, 2023.

PC:- 1.

Heard Mr. Girish Kulkarni, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Jigar Agarwal, learned Counsel for respondent No.1 and Mr. S.V. Gavand, learned APP for respondent No.2/State.

2.

Mr. Agarwal, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.1/complainant has placed on record the afdavit thereby extending consent for quashing. Mr. Agarwal has identifed respondent No.1/complainant, who is present in the Court. 3.

Mr. Gavand, learned APP interacted with respondent No.1/complainant and states that respondent No.1/complainant has voluntarily consented for quashing of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners which is subject matter of 1/3

the present petition.

4.

The genesis of the ofence is based on the allegations of cruelty and ill-treatment by the petitioners to the respondent No.1/complainant which has resulted into registration of Crime No.92 of 2016 registered with Bhoiwada Police Station, Mumbai on 18 March 2016 for the ofences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 read with 34 of the IPC.

5.

The factum is that the petitioners are already chargesheeted. We are informed that one time alimony amount agreed between the parties is Rs.5 Lakhs. Out of which, Rs.2 Lakhs has already paid to the respondent No.1 which she acknowledges through her counsel.

6.

As far as balance amount of Rs.3 Lakhs is concerned, Mr.Kulkarni has handed over Demand Draft of Rs.3 Lakhs to respondent No.1/complainant, which she acknowledges. 7.

In the backdrop of aforesaid, respondent No.1 who is physically present in the Court undertakes to withdraw all the proceedings against the petitioners including that which are pending on the fle of Family Court. Since the statement is made on instructions, the same is accepted as Undertaking to the Court.

8.

In the aforesaid background and having regard to the consent afdavit which is placed on record, no purpose will be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending against 2/3

the petitioners. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 1, we deem it appropriate to allow the petition.

9.

The Petition as such stands allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

10.

Statement made by Mr. Girish Kulkarni that the petitioners shall not fle any proceedings against the respondent No.1 based on the aforesaid matrimonial dispute is accepted.

11.

The Petition as such stands disposed of.

(N.R. BORKAR, J.) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.) (2012) 10 SCC 303 3/3