Arjun Mehrotra And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR
LSP 1 77 wp 1558.25.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.1558 of 2025 Arjun Mehrotra and others ...
Petitioners.
V/s.
State of Maharashtra and anr.
...
Respondents.
Mr. Abhishek Salian, Aditya Hegde, Deepak Rangwani i/b. Anoushka Goyal for the Petitioners.
Mr. Shashank Sardesai for the Respondent No.2. Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for the State.
LATA SUNIL PANJWANI CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M. MODAK, JJ.
LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Date: 2025.04.16 16:13:21 +0530 DATE : 9th April 2025.
P.C. :
This is a petition for quashing of the FIR registered at Samta Nagar Police Station vide C.R. No.597/2021 under Sections 498-A, 406,509,323,504,506, 377 and 34 of IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and consequential proceedings arising from it.
2.
Heard Mr. Abhishek Salian, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, Mr. Shashank Sardesai, the learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2 and Mr. Gavand, the learned APP appearing for the State.
3.
The FIR is lodged by the Respondent No.2. The Petitioner
LSP 2 77 wp 1558.25.doc No.1 is her husband. The two other Petitioners are his parents. It is not necessary to describe the FIR in detail because the parties have now settled the matter and the prayer is made for quashing by consent.
The gist of the FIR is that the informant had married with the Petitioner No.1 on 9th February 2020. After their marriage her entire Streedhan was taken by the Petitioners and retained by them. There are allegations of physical assault and unnatural physical relations imposed by the Petitioner No.1 on her. It is alleged that the Petitioner No.1 had taken a separate flat but the informant was not taken to that flat. There was no privacy. The informant was made to stay with the Petitioners in a joint family. The Petitioner No.1 used to constantly abuse and assault her. The other two Petitioners never stopped him from doing it. She was not permitted to use the articles and even the car. The Petitioner No.1 used to make video calls to his friend which affected the informant and her personal life. In January 2021 the informant's parents tried to intervene but they were humiliated. When she returned home on 20th February 2021, she could not open the house. The locks were changed, therefore, she had to reside in a guest house. On these allegations the FIR is lodged.
4.
Now the parties have settled the matter. The Respondent No.2 has filed her affidavit of consent. She has stated in the affidavit that matter is settled amicably between the parties and they have
LSP 3 77 wp 1558.25.doc filed consent terms in the Court at Ghaziabad. She has no further grievance or claim against the Petitioners. She has given her consent for withdrawal of the F.I.R. and subsequent proceedings arising from that FIR.
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 that she has absolutely no objection for quashing of these proceedings and settlement is arrived at with her full satisfaction. The nature of dispute was purely personal in nature. The Society at large was not involved. The matter is settled between the parties. Therefore, we are inclined to allow this petition. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.
(ii) The FIR registered at Samta Nagar Police Station vide C.R. No.597/2021 under Sections 498-A, 406,509,323,504,506, 377 and 34 of IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and consequential proceedings arising from it are hereby quashed and set aside 6.
The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (S.M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL,J)