Mayur Manoj Deshpande v. State Of Maharashtra

: 1 :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3337 OF 2024 Mayur Manoj Deshpande and others .....Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others .....Respondents ----- Mr. Vikas S. Agarwal, Advocate i/b. Rashmie D. Dhongde for the Petitioners.

Smt. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State. Ms. Suvarna Yadav, Advocate a/w. Shalaka Navghare for the Respondent No.3.

----- CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 28th MARCH, 2025 P.C. :

1.

This is a Petition for quashing of the FIR registered vide C.R. No.234/2021 dated 1.7.2021 at Nerul police station, Navi Mumbai resulting in R.C.C. No.369/2022 pending before the J.M.F.C. Belapur under Sections 498-A, 417, 406, 506 read with 34 of IPC.

2.

Heard Mr. Vikas Agarwal, learned counsel for the by PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Date:

2025.04.02 19:07:47 +0530 Petitioners, Smt. M.H. Mhatre, learned APP for the Respondent PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Deshmane(PS)

: 2 :

Nos.1 & 2-State and Ms. Suvarna Yadav, learned counsel for the Respondent No.3.

3.

The FIR was lodged by the Respondent No.3. The Petitioner No.1 was her husband and the other two Petitioners are the parents of the Petitioner No.1. The FIR mentions that the Respondent No.3 got married with the Petitioner No.1 on 9.5.2018 at Mumbai. The expenses for the marriage were spent by the informant's parents. The FIR mentions that the Petitioner No.1 was avoiding to keep physical relations with the Respondent No.3. There are allegations that the Petitioners were asking the Respondent No.3 to spend money for their household expenses. The informant - Respondent No.3 was working in Hyderabad. The Petitioner Nos.2 & 3 used to accompany the couple wherever they went for trips at different places. In 2019, the Respondent No.3 arranged to get a job for the Petitioner No.1 at Hyderabad, but, he was not happy to stay at Hyderabad. He left the job and went back to reside with his parents. There are allegations that the Respondent No.3 was harassed and ill-treated. On these allegations, the FIR

: 3 :

is lodged.

4.

The charge-sheet is already filed, however, it is not annexed to the Petition. Learned APP produced a copy of the charge-sheet for perusal of the Court. The charge-sheet contains statements of parents and sister of the Respondent No.3. They have supported the allegations in the FIR. 5.

Now the parties have settled the matter. The Respondent No.3 has filed her affidavit giving her consent to quash the criminal proceedings. She has stated that the Petitioners have returned her articles and belongings and the marriage was dissolved by the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thane. She has no objection for quashing of the criminal proceedings.

6.

The dispute between the parties is purely personal in nature. The parties have settled all their disputes. They have decided to move ahead in their life. No purpose would be served by keeping the criminal prosecution alive. Therefore, we are inclined to allow this Petition.

: 4 :

7.

Hence, the following order:

:: O R D E R ::

i.

The FIR being C.R. No.234/2021 registered at Nerul police station, Navi Mumbai as well as the consequent criminal proceedings being R.C.C. No.369/2022 pending before the J.M.F.C. Belapur, Navi Mumbai are quashed and set aside.

ii.

The Petition is disposed of accordingly.

( S.M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Deshmane (PS)