Pranav Pratap Deshmukh And ANR v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2853 OF 2024 SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR 1.
Pranav Pratap Deshmukh 2.
Pratap Madhukar Deshmukh SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date: 2025.04.23 16:45:17 +0530 3.
Sangita Prataprao Deshmukh
...Petitioners
Versus
1.
The State of Maharashtra and Another
...Respondents
***** Ms.Saili Dhuru - Advocate for Petitioners.
Smt.M.H.Mhatre - APP for Respondent No.1 - State. Mr.Rushikesh Kale - Advocate for Respondent No.2. ***** CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M.MODAK, JJ.
DATE : 22nd APRIL 2025 P.C. :
1.
Heard learned counsel Ms.Dhuru for the Petitioners, learned APP Smt.Mhatre for Respondent No.1 - State and learned counsel Mr.Kale for Respondent No.2. 2.
Leave to amend to add the case number of the proceedings pending before the Magistrate of which quashing is sought.
3.
The Petition is for the quashing of the F.I.R.
registered vide the C.R. No.999 of 2023 at Hinjewadi Police Station, Pune under Sections 498-A, 323, 406, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC"). The investigation is over. The charge-sheet is filed, and the case is pending vide the R.C.C. No.1761 of 2024 before the learned JMFC - Pune against the Petitioners. The charge-sheet is not annexed to this Petition. However, learned APP produced copy of the charge-sheet for our perusal. We have perused the charge-sheet. The F.I.R. was lodged by the Respondent No.2. The Petitioner No.1 is her husband and the other two Petitioners are his parents.
4.
It is not necessary to refer to the allegations in the F.I.R. because the parties have now settled the dispute. The gist of the F.I.R. is that the informant got married with the Petitioner No.1 on 17th December 2020. It is her case that the Petitioner No.1's health issues and previous history was concealed from the informant before marriage. After her marriage, her stridhan was retained by the Petitioners. She was continuously harassed on demand of money. She took up a job in Pune. The Petitioner No.1 used to visit her on some
occasions. Other two Petitioners were not staying in Pune. Inspite of this long distance, the harassment continued. It is her case that the Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 used to instigate the Petitioner No.1. He on his part used to harass on demand of money.
On these allegations, the F.I.R. is lodged. The charge-sheet contains the statements of the parents and brothers of the First-Informant.
5.
The parties have now settled the dispute. The Respondent No.2 i.e. the First-Informant has filed her Affidavitin-Reply. She has stated that during pendency of the proceedings, with the efforts of the respectable persons from both the parties, the settlement is arrived at. Both the parties have decided to lead their life independently. She has given her specific "No objection" for quashing of these proceedings. 6.
The Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned counsel. She reiterated the averments in the Affidavit. She stated before the Court that the settlement was to her satisfaction, and she does not wish to continue with the prosecution.
7.
The dispute between the parties is purely personal in nature. The society at large is not involved. The dispute is settled. Therefore, we are inclined to allow this Petition. Hence, the following order:-
O R D E R
(i) The F.I.R. registered vide C.R. No.999 of 2023 at the Hinjewadi Police Station - Pune and the consequent proceeding i.e. R.C.C. No.1761 of 2024 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class - Pune are quashed and set aside.
8.
With these observations, the Petition is disposed of. (S.M.MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)