Anjana Satishchand Anand v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2191 OF 2025 Anjana Satishchand Anand

...Petitioner

Versus

by SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date:

2025.04.29 19:50:56 +0530 The State of Maharashtra and Another

...Respondents

SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR ***** Mr.Anukul Seth i/b. Mr.Harsh Ghangurde - Advocate for Petitioner.

Smt.M.M.Deshmukh - APP for Respondent No.1 - State. Mr.Vishal Hegde a/w Ms.Aishwarya Jose, Mr.S.V.Rao, Ms.Anuja Apte - Advocates for Respondent No.2.

***** CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M.MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 25th APRIL 2025 P.C. :

1.

This is a Petition for quashing of the F.I.R. bearing C.R. No.9 of 2021 dated 25th January 2021 registered at Malabar Hill Police Station under Sections 342 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC") and the resultant case bearing No.PW/4000321/2021 pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, 40th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai. 2.

Heard learned counsel Mr.Anukul Seth for the Petitioner, learned APP Smt.Deshmukh for the Respondent

No.1 - State, and the learned counsel Mr.Hegde for Respondent No.2.

3.

This is a strange case where a 78 year old informant has lodged the F.I.R. against his 71 year old wife. They have two sons, and one daughter. All of them are settled. One son is in Nashik, the other is in Canada, and the daughter is in Delhi. The F.I.R. mentions that there was some dispute about their flat at Nepeansea Road, Malabar Hill, Mumbai. The informant has undergone angioplasty, and he was affected by corona on two occasions. He had kept a house help. The incident occurred on 24th January 2021 at around 7.30 a.m. The allegations are, that there was quarrel between the couple, and the Petitioner showed a knife to him, and threatened him. He got scared, and went to his room. The Petitioner locked the room from outside, and opened it after some time. After that, this F.I.R. is lodged.

4.

The investigation was carried out, and the chargesheet was filed. There are statements of women security guards who were employed at that point of time. They have supported the informant's case.

5.

Now, the parties have settled their dispute. Both of

them are senior citizens, and are married since 1973. Their children are well settled. We are informed, that the informant also has a house in Shimla, and he visits Mumbai off and on. In this background, both of them have settled the matter. 6.

The Respondent No.2 has filed his Affidavit giving specific 'No objection' for quashing of these proceedings. He is present in the Court. He is identified by his learned counsel. The informant stated before the Court, that he stood by the averments in the Affidavit. The dispute with his wife is resolved. Both of them are living peacefully, and there is no apprehension in his mind. He has no grudge against his wife, and both of them are living happily, and therefore, he wants the proceedings to be quashed.

7.

We have considered these submissions. The facts speak for itself. The Petitioner, and the Respondent No.2 are more than 70 years of age. They are living peacefully as of today. It would be in their interest that the prosecution is quashed, and set aside. No purpose will be served by continuation of the prosecution. Therefore, we are inclined to allow this Petition. Hence, the following order:-

O R D E R

(i) The F.I.R. registered vide C.R.No.9 of 2021 at Malabar Hill Police Station - Mumbai, and the concomitant case bearing No.PW/4000321/2021 pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, 40th Court, Girgaon, Mumbai are quashed and set aside.

8.

With these observations, the Petition is disposed of. (S.M.MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)