Vivek Vimalchand Burad And ORS v. State Of Maharashtra And ORS

: 1 :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2098 OF 2025

1. Vivek Vimalchand Burad

2. Shakuntala Vimalchand Burad

3. Vimalchand Burad

4. Visha Vimalchand Burad .....Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Maharashtra

2. Commissioner of Police Mumbai.

3. Tina Vivek Burad @ Tina Haran .....Respondents ----- Mr. R. A. Naik - Advocate for the Petitioners. Ms. M. H. Mhatre - APP for the Respondent-State. Adv. Sachin R. Pawar - Advocate fo rRespondent No. 3. Tina Haran - Respondent No. 3 present in-person ----- CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 23rd APRIL 2025 P.C. :

1.

This is a petition for quashing of the proceeding pending with the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Andheri 22nd Court in PW/1994 of 2023 arising out of CR No. 80 of 2023 registered at MIDC Police Station Andheri on 01.02.2023 under Sections 498-A, 406, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. by SEEMA KSHITIJ YELKAR Date:

2025.04.28 12:44:11 +0530 SEEMA KSHITIJ YELKAR

: 2 :

2.

The Parties have settled the matter and the petition is filed for quashing by consent. The F.I.R. was lodged by the Respondent No. 3. The Petitioner No. 1 was her husband. The Petitioner No. 2 and 3 are his parents and the Petitioner No. 4 is his sister. The F.I.R. lodged by the Respondent No. 3 mentions that she got married with the Petitioner No. 1 on 23.01.2022. At that time, her mother had given her streedhan consisting of various ornaments. 3.

Few day after the marriage, the Petitioners started harassing her, because according to them, the informant's family had not spent sufficient amount during the wedding. The husband was not treating the informant properly. There are allegations that they demanded Rs. 25 lakhs from the informant. The Petitioner No. 1 was paid an amount of Rs. 5 Lakhs; but the harassment continued thereafter. She was driven out of her matrimonial house on 11.09.2022. In October 2022, she tried to go back to her matrimonial house, she was accompanied by her mother and brother; but her mother was assaulted by her father-in-law. On all these allegations, the F.I.R. is lodged.

4.

The investigation was carried out and the charge-sheet was filed. It contains the statements of the mother, brother, sister and

: 3 :

uncle of the first informant. They have supported her allegations made in the F.I.R..

5.

The Parties have now settled their dispute. The Respondent No. 3 has filed her affidavit recording that fact with the reference to the full and final settlement for a particular amount. She has given her specific no objection for quashing of these proceedings. The first informant-Respondent No. 3 is present before the Court. She is identified by her learned counsel. She reiterated the statements made in the affidavit. She stated before the Court that she has no objection if the proceedings are quashed.

6.

The dispute between the parties is purely personal in nature. In view of the settlement, we are inclined to allow this writ petition. Hence, the following order :-

ORDER

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.

(ii) The F.I.R. registered against the present Petitioners vide C.R. No. 80 of 2023 at MIDC Police Station, Andheri under Sections 498-A, 406, 506, 504, 323 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the consequent proceeding

: 4 :

bearing no. PW/1994 of 2023 pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Andheri 22nd Court, Mumbai are quashed and set aside.

7.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (S.M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)