Amol Ramesh Sawant v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

1 / 3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.4099 OF 2025 Amol Ramesh Sawant .... Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

.... Respondents .......

• Mr. Sanjay N. Dhadam, Advocate for Petitioner. • Ms. Sharmila S. Kaushik, APP for the State/Respondent. • Mr. Nandkishore Parabkar, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

CORAM

: SARANG V. KOTWAL & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.

DATE : 08th SEPTEMBER, 2025 P.C. :

1.

This is a Petition for quashing of the proceedings bearing RCC No.2807/2018 pending before the JMFC, Thane, arising out of the C.R.No.03/2018 registered with Vartak Nagar Police Station, u/s 498-A, 323, 504, 427 of the Indian Penal Code. 2.

Heard Mr. Sanjay N. Dhadam, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Nandkishore Parabkar, learned counsel for the Digitally signed by MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date:

2025.09.09 15:22:44 +0530 MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Respondent No.2 and Ms. Sharmila S. Kaushik, learned APP for the State.

Nesarikar

2 / 3 3.

It is not necessary to refer to allegations in the chargesheet because the parties have settled their dispute and in fact they are staying together peacefully with their son. Very briefly the allegations pertain to the ill-treatment meted out to the Respondent No.2. There are other allegations about the Petitioner's friendship with another lady. The charge-sheet contains the statements of the Respondent No.2's father and brother as well as the relatives of the Petitioner. 4.

As mentioned earlier, the parties have now settled their dispute. The Respondent No.2 has filed her affidavit in which she has stated that the Petitioner and the Respondent No.2 have amicably settled the dispute among themselves with intervention of both the families and friends. She did not wish to proceed with the present proceedings lodged at her instance. Paragraph No.4 specifically mentions that from the last two years the Petitioner and the Respondent No.2 are residing together with their son.

3 / 3 5.

The Petitioner as well as the Respondent No.2 are both present in the Court. Both of them stated before the Court that they are living peacefully together. The Respondent No.2 reiterated the contents of the affidavit and stated before the Court that she has no objection for quashing of the proceedings. She stated that both of them are residing happily together with their son.

6.

Considering this situation and in the interest of both the parties, we are inclined to allow this Petition. 7.

Hence, the following order :

O R D E R

(i) The R.C.C. No.2807/2018 pending before the J.M.F.C., Thane, arising out of the C.R.No.03/2018 registered with Vartak Nagar Police Station, are quashed and set aside.

(ii) The Petition is disposed of.

(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)