Sneha Pradeep Jadhav And ORS v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.5246 OF 2025 Sneha Pradeep Jadhav and others .....Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and another .....Respondents ----- Ms. Pratibha Shelke, Advocate for the Petitioners. Ms. Dhanalaxmi Krishnaiyar, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr.P.B. Gujar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. ----- CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.
DATE : 10th OCTOBER, 2025 P.C. :
1.
This is a Petition for quashing of the proceedings arising out of C.R. No.62/2025 registered at Bhor police station, Pune Rural under Sections 333, 189(2), 191(2), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the chargesheet bearing R.C.C. No.170/2025 (earlier R.C.C. No.593/2025) pending before the learned J.M.F.C, Bhor, Pune.
2.
Heard Ms. Pratibha Shelke, learned counsel for the Deshmane(PS)
: 2 :
Petitioners, Ms. Dhanalaxmi Krishnaiyar, learned APP for the Respondent No.1-State and Mr.P.B. Gujar, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2.
3.
The FIR is lodged by the Respondent No.2, who is husband of the Petitioner No.1. All the other Petitioners are related to the Petitioner No.1 from her parents' side. It is not necessary to refer to the allegations in the FIR and the chargesheet in detail because the parties have not only settled the matter but at present are staying together forgetting their past. 4.
Briefly stated the allegations in the FIR are that the Respondent No.2 had not given a mobile phone to the Petitioner No.1. Inspite of that, her father had given her a mobile phone against the informant's wish. He questioned the Petitioner No.1's father i.e. the Petitioner No.6. There was some quarrel between the informant and the Petitioner No.6 on 11.4.2025. The incident which is the subject matter of the FIR occurred on 15.4.2025 at 2.00 p.m.. At that time, all the Petitioners entered the informant's house and started assaulting him. They damaged the articles and furniture in the house. He
: 3 :
ran out of the house and called his brother. His brother came and tried to pacify the Petitioners, but he was also assaulted. On all these allegations, the FIR is lodged.
5.
The charge-sheet contains the medical certificates which show that the informant's sister-in-law had suffered minor injuries and the informant himself has suffered three simple injuries. There are statements of the informant's brother, sister-in-law etc. who had witnessed the incident. 6.
Now the matter is completely settled between the parties and in fact the Petitioner No.1 and the informant are staying together. The Respondent No.2 has filed his affidavit. He has stated that the Petitioner No.1 and the Respondent No.2 have decided to stay together to save their matrimonial life and that he had no grievance against the Petitioners any more. He has given his specific no objection for quashing of these proceedings.
7.
Considering this situation and in the interest of justice as well as in the interest of both the parties, we are
: 4 :
inclined to allow this Petition. No purpose would be served in continuation of the criminal prosecution.
8.
Hence, the following order:
:: O R D E R ::
i.
The FIR being C.R. No.62/2025 registered at Bhor police station, Pune Rural as well as the consequent criminal prosecution being R.C.C. No.170/2025 (earlier R.C.C. No.593/2025) pending before the learned J.M.F.C, Bhor, Pune, are quashed and set aside.
ii.
The Petition is disposed of accordingly.
( SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Deshmane (PS) by PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Date:
2025.10.14 12:27:07 +0530 PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE