Shambhunath Bhagat And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

Gokhale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 852 OF 2024 Shambhu Nath Bhagat & Ors.

..Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

..Respondents __________ Mr. Sadanand Bansode a/w. Shailesh Waghmare for Applicants. Mr. B.V. Holambe Patil, APP for State/Respondent. Ms. Swati Singh for the Respondent No.2.

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

DATE : 20 FEBRUARY 2025 PC :

1.

This is an application for quashing of the F.I.R. registered vide C.R.No.1330 of 2022 at Dahisar police station, Mumbai, on 02.08.2022, under sections 498A, 406, 504 and 506 r/w. 34 of the I.P.C. and the consequent proceeding arising out of the said F.I.R. The F.I.R. is lodged by the Respondent No.2. The Applicant No.4 is her husband, the Applicant Nos.1 and 2 are his parents and the Applicant No.3 is his sister.

2.

The Respondent No.2 has stated in her F.I.R. that, she Digitally signed by VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Date:

2025.02.25 11:10:29 +0530 VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE

got married with the applicant No.4 on 12.02.2021 at Dahisar. At that time, her father had spent for the expenses. He had given her gold ornaments and other household articles. On the date of wedding itself, because of greed for money the Petitioners had pressurised the Respondent No.2's father and therefore, he had suffered from high blood pressure. He had to be admitted to hospital. The F.I.R. thereafter goes on to mention that the Respondent No.2 was continuously harassed on demand of money. The sister in law of the Respondent No.2 was married, but she used to interfere in her matrimonial life. Respondent No.2's husband was aggressive in nature. The Respondent No.2 who is present in the Court informs that, during that phase she had lost her job. The F.I.R. mentions that she had to depend on her husband and his family for the financial support. They took advantage of the situation and harassed her more. They also demanded dowry. They misappropriated her stridhan. On these allegations the F.I.R. was lodged.

3.

The parties have now settled the matter. The Respondent No.2 has filed her Affidavit. She has stated that the settlement is

arrived at for payment of sum of Rs.4 lakhs to her as a full and final settlement. In Paragraph-4, she has stated that she has no objection if the Case No.3791/PW/2023 pending before the J.M.F.C., 26th Court, at Borivali, Mumbai arising out of the C.R.No.1330 of 2022 registered at Dahisar police station is quashed and set aside.

4.

The dispute between the parties is purely personal in nature. They have settled their dispute. The Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. She is represented by her learned counsel Ms. Swati Singh. She identifies the Respondent No.2. Learned counsel submitted that she would be filing her Vakilpatra within a period of two weeks from today. Her statement is accepted. The Respondent No.2 stated before the Court that she has no objection for quashing of the proceedings. She stood by the averments in the affidavit. As mentioned earlier, since the dispute is purely personal in nature and the society is not involved, we are inclined to allow this application.

5.

Hence, the following order:

O R D E R

i) The F.I.R. registered vide C.R.No.1330 of 2022 at Dahisar police station, Mumbai, on 02.08.2022, under sections 498A, 406, 504 and 506 r/w. 34 of the I.P.C. and the consequent proceeding arising out of the said F.I.R., are quashed and set aside.

ii) The Application is disposed of.

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