Shubham Anjukumar Singhal And ANR v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
LSP 1 907 wp 1204.25.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.1204 of 2025 Mr. Shubham Anujkumar Singhal and others ...
Petitioners V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and anr.
...
Respondents.
Mr. Jayant Bhatt a/w. Tanmay Bidkar for the Petitioners. Digitally signed by LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Date:
2025.03.15 12:19:22 +0530 Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP for the State.
Ms. Veena Gowda for the Respondent No.2.
LATA SUNIL PANJWANI CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M. MODAK, JJ.
DATE : 12th March 2025.
P.C. :
This is the petition for quashing of FIR registered vide C.R. No.19/2025 at Bandra Police Station on 6th January 2025 under Sections 498A, 406,504,506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The FIR is lodged by the Respondent No.2. The Petitioner No.1 is her husband and that Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are his parents. It is not necessary to refer to the allegations made in the FIR in detail because parties have settled the matter. 2.
The gist of the allegations are that Respondent No.2 had got married with Petitioner No.1 on 5th February 2017. They were together till 28th July 2024. During that period she was ill treated and harassed. Her Stridhan and her car was taken by the Petitioners
LSP 2 907 wp 1204.25.doc and was not returned. There are certain instances of ill treatment caused to her which are mentioned in the FIR. The couple was blessed with a daughter with great difficulty who is at present with the Respondent No.2.
3.
The Petitioners had preferred an anticipatory bail application before the Sessions Court. During the hearing of that application the parties were referred for mediation and the mediation has become successful. The parties have entered into Consent Terms. The Respondent No.2 has filed affidavit for giving no objection for quashing of the present proceedings. There is a reference to payment of sum of Rs.82 Lakhs which was to be paid to the Respondent No.2 by the Petitioners. The learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 informed the Court that the Demand Draft for the said amount is handed over to the Respondent No.2 today. The Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned Counsel. She reiterated the contents of the affidavit. She accepted that she has received the said Demand Draft for Rs.82 Lakhs. She submitted that she has no objection for quashing of the proceedings. The learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 submitted that it is expected from the Petitioner No.1 that he co-operates in the divorce proceedings which are pending before the Family Court.
4.
The learned Counsel for the Petitioner, on instructions, submitted that the Petitioner No.1 has to travel abroad but he will co-operate in the proceedings before the Family Court which is filed
LSP 3 907 wp 1204.25.doc for divorce between the parties.
5.
We have considered this situation. The matter is now settled between the parties to the satisfaction of the Respondent No.2. The Respondent No.2 has no grievance against the Petitioners any more. The daughter is with the Respondent No.2. The Society at large is not involved. Therefore, we are inclined to allow this petition. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.
(ii) The F.I.R. registered vide C.R. No.19/2025 with Bandra Police Station on 6th January 2025 under Sections 498-A, 406,504,506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the consequent proceedings are hereby quashed and set aside.
6.
The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (S.M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL,J)