Sameer Yashwant More And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1773 OF 2024 Sameer Yashwant More and others .....Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and another .....Respondents ----- Mr. Shambhu M. Jha, Advocate a/w. Suraj Pandey, Aashish Pathak, Afsar Ansari for the Applicants.
Mr. Anand S. Shalgaokar, APP for the Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Jonita D'Abreao, Advocate i/b. JRA Law for the Respondent No.2.
----- CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & DR.NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE : 10th DECEMBER, 2024 P.C. :
1.
This is an Application for quashing of the FIR registered vide C.R. No.114/2021 dated 27.3.2021 with Manikpur police station under Sections 354, 504, 506 read with 34 of IPC resulting in R.C.C. No.494/2022 pending before the J.M.F.C., Vasai.
PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Date: 2024.12.13 10:39:54 +0530 Deshmane(PS)
: 2 :
2.
The FIR is lodged by the Respondent No.2. She has stated that she was married to the Petitioner No.1. The Petitioner No.2 is the father and Petitioner No.3 is a common friend of the Petitioner No.1's family. The FIR mentions that the informant had got married with the Petitioner No.1 on 17.8.2015 but because of the ill-treatment meted out to her she has started residing separately with her parents. She had filed matrimonial petition for divorce in the Court at Vasai. On 26.3.2021 at about 1.00 p.m., the Petitioners came to her house. They told her that they wanted to have discussion with her and on that pretext they called her near her building. She got down to that spot. She was forcibly made to sit in a car and she was taken away. The FIR mentions that the Petitioner No.
2 snatched her mobile phone and in the process outraged her modesty. In the meantime, the Petitioner No.3 told the others that since she was not willing to accompany them she should be dropped back at her parents' place. Accordingly she was dropped at her parents' house. On this basis, the FIR is lodged.
: 3 :
was filed. The main allegations remain as mentioned in the FIR.
3.
Now the parties have settled the dispute. It is mentioned in the affidavit that the matter is settled and they have decided to put an end to the litigation. The issue has been resolved amicably between them. No purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings. She has given her specific no objection for quashing of the FIR in paragraph No.6 of the affidavit. The Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned counsel. The Respondent No.2 reiterated the contents of the affidavit and stated before the Court that she has no objection for quashing of the proceedings.
4.
The dispute between the parties is purely personal in nature. The society at large is not involved. The parties are separated and are leaving separately. In this view of the matter, we are inclined to allow this Application. 5.
Hence, the following order:
: 4 :
:: O R D E R ::
i.
The FIR being C.R. No.114/2021 dated 27.3.2021 with Manikpur police station as well as the subsequent criminal proceedings being R.C.C. No.494/2022 pending before the J.M.F.C., Vasai, are quashed and set aside.
ii.
The Application is disposed of accordingly.
( DR.NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Deshmane (PS)