Yogesh Shivaprasad Jadeyaru And ORS v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

: 1 :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1766 OF 2024

1. Yogesh Shivaprasad Jadeyaru

2. Yashoda Shivaprasad Jadeyaru

3. Shivaprasad Jadeyaru Siddaramappa

4. Rudresh Shivaprasad Jadeyaru .....Petitioners

Versus

1. The State Of Maharashtra

2. Aishwarya Yogesh Jadeyaru.

.....Respondents ----- Bharat K. Manghani a/w Dr. Prashant Pratap a/w Prachi Pratap a/w Omkar Deshpande a/w Drushti Gala - Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. S. V. Gavand - APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Ajit V. Alange - Advocate for Respondent No. 2. ----- CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 25th FEBRUARY 2025 P.C. :

1.

This is a petition for quashing of the F.I.R. registered at Faujdar Chavadi Police Station, Solapur, vide C.R. No. 79 of 2024 on 09/02/2024 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

SEEMA KSHITIJ YELKAR by SEEMA KSHITIJ YELKAR Date:

2025.02.28 11:01:39 +0530

: 2 :

2.

Heard learned Counsel Shri Manghani for the Petitioners, learned Advocate Shri Alange for the Respondent No. 2 and learned APP Shri Gavand for the Respondent No. 1-State. 3.

The F.I.R. is lodged by the Respondent No. 2. The Petitioner No. 1 is her husband. The Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 are his parents and the Petitioner No. 4 is his brother. The F.I.R. mentions that the Respondent No. 2 got married with the Petitioner No. 1 on 18.12.2022. After that, she started residing with the Petitioners at Bengaluru. After initial four to five days, the Petitioners started harassing her as they were not happy with the expenses spent by the Respondent No. 2's family. Then the couple started residing separately from the other Petitioners, but those Petitioners used to visit them at their rented flat at Bengaluru. There are allegations that, all the Petitioners continued ill treating and harassing her. They were demanding Rs. 25 lakhs for purchase of a flat. The husband was insisting that she should bring that money from her parents. On these allegations, they continuously harassed her. Then she came back to her parents' house on 03.11.2023 and thereafter this F.I.R. is lodged.

: 3 :

4.

During the pendency of this petition, the matter was sent for mediation. The Parties have arrived at a settlement. They have entered into Consent terms. Today the Respondent No. 2 has filed her affidavit of consent, giving no objection for quashing of the F.I.R.. The affidavit is produced before the Court. It is affirmed before the Superintendent of the District and Sessions Court, Solapur. It is mentioned in the affidavit that, she has no objection for quashing of the C.R. No. 79 of 2024 registered at Faujdar Chavadi Police Station. The Respondent No. 2 is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned Counsel. She reiterated the contents of the affidavit, and she told the Court that she has no objection for quashing of this proceeding.

5.

The dispute is purely personal in nature. It is successfully settled. Now the Parties have no grievance against each other. The continuation of the proceedings would be abuse of the process of law. We are inclined to allow this petition. Hence, the following order:-

ORDER

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.

: 4 :

(ii) The F.I.R. registered vide C.R. No. 79 of 2024 at the Faujdar Chavadi Police Station under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the consequent proceedings are quashed and set aside. 6.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (S.M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)