Piyush Vikas Kulkarni And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR
Gokhale
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2324 OF 2025 Piyush Vikas Kulkarni & Ors.
..Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
..Respondents __________ Mr. Mohammed Naved I. Mulla a/w. Annanya Bhosale i/b. K. S. Shukla for Petitioners.
Ms. Sangeeta D. Shinde, APP for State/Respondent. Ms. Garima Pandey, (through V.C.) for the Respondent No.2. __________ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.
DATE : 14 OCTOBER 2025 PC :
1.
This is a petition for quashing of the F.I.R. registered vide C.R.No.1139 of 2023 at Hinjwadi police station, PimpriChinchwad, on 09.10.2023, under sections 498-A, 354 and 377 of the I.P.C. and the subsequent proceedings arising out of the same. A copy of the charge-sheet is not annexed to the petition. Learned APP produced a copy of the charge-sheet for our perusal. The main allegations are made by the Respondent No.2 against the Petitioners. It is not necessary to refer to the allegations in detail Digitally signed by VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Date:
2025.10.15 10:55:44 +0530 VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE
because the parties have not only settled their dispute, but, are in fact staying together. The Petitioner No.1 is the husband of the Respondent No.2, the Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are his parents and the Petitioner No.4 is his maternal uncle.
2.
Briefly stated, the allegations in the F.I.R. are that the informant was working in a bank. The Petitioner No.1 had current account in that bank. They came in contact. They fell in love and then they got married on 02.05.2015. Today, they have a daughter who is aged 6 years. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that, after the marriage, the Petitioner No.1 used to illtreat her, beat her and used to suspect her. He used to consume liquor and then illtreat her. After their daughter was born, the informant and her daughter were not looked after. They are some allegations against the Petitioner No.4 of outraging her modesty. There are certain allegations attracting Section 377 of the I.P.C. On these allegations the F.I.R. was lodged.
3.
As mentioned earlier, the parties have settled their dispute. The Respondent No.2 has filed her Affidavit giving
consent for quashing of the proceedings. She has stated that due to intervention of the elders in the family and the well wishers, and looking at the best interest of their daughter, they have amicably resolved all the dispute. There were various proceedings initiated between the parties. All those proceedings are put to rest. She has clearly stated that, she has no objection for quashing of the present F.I.R. and the consequent proceedings.
4.
The Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned counsel. She stated before the Court that she is residing happily with the Petitioners since more than a year and there is no difficulty in their peaceful cohabitation. She submitted that, in these circumstances, the proceedings be quashed.
5.
Considering this development, no purpose would be served in continuing with the criminal prosecution. Therefore, in the interest of justice and, in particular, in the interest of the daughter of the Respondent No.2 and all other parties, we are inclined to allow this petition.
6.
Hence, the following order:
O R D E R
i) The F.I.R. registered vide C.R.No.1139 of 2023 at Hinjwadi police station, Pimpri-Chinchwad, on 09.10.2023, under sections 498-A, 354 and 377 of the I.P.C. and the subsequent proceedings arising out of the same, are quashed and set aside.
ii) The Writ Petition is disposed of.
(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)