Kaustubh Deepak Nadgauda And ORS. v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR.

RVC 11-Apl-1267-2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION (A.P.L.) NO. 1267 OF 2022 1.

Kaustubh Deepak Nadgauda ] 2.

Uma Deepak Nadgauda ] 3.

Leela Vishwanath Nadgauda ] 4.

Medha Dilip Vakil ] ... Applicants V/s.

1.

The State of Maharashtra ] 2.

Piyusha Koustubh Nadgauda ] ... Respondents _______________________________________ Mr. Pandit Kasar i/b. Mr. Rohit Mangsule for Applicants. Ms. Prajakta P. Shinde, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Akshay Kulkarni for Respondent No.2.

_______________________________________ CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 31st July 2025.

P.C. :

1) Leave to amend to incorporate challenge to R.C.C. No. 746 of 2016 pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, court No.1, Kolhapur, in the prayer clause, granted. 1.1) Amendment be carried out forthwith.

2) Applicants i.e. husband, mother-in-law, grand-mother-in-law and aunt of Applicant No.1, have filed present Application under Section 482 of 1/2

RVC 11-Apl-1267-2022.doc Criminal Procedure Code for quashing of R.C.C. No. 746 of 2016 pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Kolhapur, arising out of CR No. 253 of 2016 dated 11th November 2016 registered with Karvir Police Station, District Kolhapur, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, with the consent of Respondent No.2, i.e. the wife of Applicant No.1.

3) Mr. Kulkarni, learned Advocate appearing for Respondent No.2 tendered across the bar her Affidavit dated 31st July 2025 duly affirmed before the Assistant Registrar of this Court. It is stated therein that, in Family Petition No. 169 of 2022 pending on the file of Family Court at Kolhapur, the Applicant No.1 and Respondent No.2 have decided to settle their disputes and differences amicably and the Applicant No.1 has paid a lump sum maintenance amount in the name of their son. In para No.8 thereof, the Respondent No.2 has stated that, she has no objection if the present Application is allowed.

3.1) Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court and through her Advocate reiterates the contents of her Affidavit dated 31st July 2025 and her 'no objection' for quashing of the crime in question. 4) In view thereof, Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and amended prayer clause (ai).

( RAJESH S. PATIL, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. ) by RAJESH VASANT CHITTEWAN Date:

2025.08.05 12:47:26 +0530 RAJESH VASANT CHITTEWAN 2/2