Dr. Mayuresh Chandrakant Saswade And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 121 OF 2020 1.

Dr. Mayuresh Chandrakant Saswade, Age: 30 yrs, Occ: Service, 2.

Chandrakant Bhausaheb Saswade, Age: 62 yrs, Occ: Retired, 3.

Sau. Vandana Chandrakant Saswade, Age: 58 yrs, Occ: Service, 4.

Kalpesh Chandrakant Saswade, Age: 34 yrs, Occ: Service, 5.

Sau. Snehal Kalpesh Saswade, Age: 30 yrs, Occ: Housewife, All R/ at. Tingare Nagar, Lane No.13-L, Vishal Srushti, Flat No.2, Vishrantwadi, Pune, Tq. and Dist. Pune.

... APPLICANTS V E R S U S 1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through Sillod City Police Station, Tq. Sillod, District Aurangabad.

2.

Mrs. Komal Mayuresh Saswade, Age: 26 yrs, Occ.- Housewife, R/ at :- C/o. Bharat Devidas Gharmode, Old Vegetable Market, Main Road, Sillod Dist. Aurangabad.

... RESPONDENTS ...

Mr. Pavan P. Uttarwar, Advocate for Applicants. Mr. K. S. Patil, APP for Respondent No.1 / State. Ms. Jayashri P. Reddy, Advocate for Respondent No.2 (Appointed). ...

CORAM :

T. V. NALAWADE & SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATE :

04th November, 2020.

ORAL JUDGMENT: ( Per T. V. Nalawade, J. ) .

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard both the sides for final disposal.

The present proceeding is filed for relief of quashing of FIR No.223 of 2019, registered with Sillod City Police Station, District Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Respondent No.2 is the wife of Applicant No.1 and Applicant Nos.2 to 5 are relatives of Applicant No.1.

During arguments, the learned counsel for Applicants and the learned counsel for Respondent No.2 submitted that the parties have settled the dispute. Affidavit to that effect of Respondent No.2 is filed on record. This affidavit shows that Respondent No.2 has no objection to grant the relief claimed. As it is a matter, which has arisen out of matrimonial dispute, this Court holds that the relief needs to be granted. In the result, the following order is passed:

O R D E R

I.

The application is allowed.

II.

Relief is granted in terms of prayer clause (B). III.

The fees of the appointed counsel is quantified as Rs.4,000/- and it is to be paid through the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad. IV.

Rule is made absolute in those terms.

[ SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J. ] [ T. V. NALAWADE, J. ] ndm