Roshan Mahanand Jha And ORS v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

: 1 :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1080 OF 2025 Roshan Mahanand Jha and others .....Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another .....Respondents ----- Mr. K. Jariwala, Advocate i/b. Akram Kapoor for the Petitioners. Smt. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Soni Jha, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. ----- CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 06th MARCH, 2025 P.C. :

1.

This is a Petition for quashing of R.C.C. No.30/2025 pending before the J.M.F.C., Vasai arising out of C.R. No.240/2024 dated 15.7.2024 registered at Arnala police station, District-Palghar under Sections 85, 316(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2.

Heard Mr. K. Jariwala, learned counsel for the Petitioners, Smt. M.H. Mhatre, learned APP for the Respondent No.1-State and Ms. Soni Jha, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2.

Deshmane(PS)

: 2 :

3.

The FIR is lodged by the Respondent No.2. The Petitioner No.1 is her husband; and the Petitioner Nos.2 & 3 are his parents. The FIR lodged by the Respondent No.2 mentions that she got married with the Petitioner No.1 on 29.5.2019. The Respondent No.2's family had spent for the expenses and had given household articles. The Petitioner No.1 had bought Stridhan for the Respondent No.2. After her marriage, she started residing with the Petitioners. The FIR goes on to mention that the Petitioners were telling that her family had spent very less and they were demanding more money; and on that count, she was ill-treated and harassed. The Stridhan was taken by the Petitioner No.1 and it was not returned to the Respondent No.2. On these allegations, the FIR was lodged.

4.

The investigation was carried out and the charge-sheet was filed. The basic allegations are made in the FIR. Now the matter is settled between the parties. The Petitioner No.1 has filed proceedings for divorce, in which the settlement is arrived at. The Respondent No.2 has filed affidavit-in-reply before this Court, wherein she has mentioned about the settlement between the parties and has recorded her clear no objection for quashing of these

: 3 :

proceedings.

5.

The Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned counsel. She reiterated the contents of the affidavit, before the Court. She stated before the Court that she has no objection for quashing of the proceedings in view of the settlement between the parties.

6.

The dispute between the parties is purely personal in nature. The society at large is not involved. Therefore, the proceedings can be quashed.

7.

Hence, the following order:

:: O R D E R ::

i.

The proceedings being R.C.C. No.30/2025 pending before the J.M.F.C., Vasai arising out of C.R. No.240/2024 dated 15.7.2024 registered at Arnala police station, DistrictPalghar, are quashed and set aside. ii.

The Petition is disposed of accordingly.

( S.M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Deshmane (PS) by PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Date:

2025.03.12 12:18:14 +0530 PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE