Rohit Mohan Patekar And ORS v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
: 1 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.135 OF 2025 Rohit Mohan Patekar and others .....Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and another .....Respondents ----- Ms. Rukmini Khairnar, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa, APP for the Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Pratik B. Rahade, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. ----- CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M. MODAK, JJ.
DATE : 17th FEBRUARY, 2025 P.C. :
1.
This is an Application for quashing of the offence registered vide C.R. No.171/2024 at Kalyan Taluka police station, District-Thane on 19.3.2024 under Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 of IPC. 2.
Heard Ms. Rukmini Khairnar, learned counsel for the Applicants, Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa, learned APP for the Respondent No.1-State and Mr. Pratik Rahade, learned counsel by PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Date:
2025.02.20 16:10:24 +0530 PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Deshmane(PS)
: 2 :
for the Respondent No.2.
3.
The FIR is lodged by the Respondent No.2. She has stated that she got married with the Applicant No.1 on 19.2.2022 at Nashik. The Applicant No.2 is Applicant No.1's mother and the Applicant No.3 is his sister. She has stated in the FIR that for about two months, there was peaceful cohabitation but since May, 2022 the Applicant No.1 started ill-treating her. He was addicted to liquor. He used to abuse her parents and used to beat her. The Applicant Nos.1 & 2 demanded Rs.10 Lakhs for purchasing a flat. When the Respondent No.2 refused, she was assaulted. There are some instances mentioned, which had taken place on 20.5.2023, 2.12.2023 and 3.12.2023 when she was beaten and abused. The FIR mentions that she was pregnant but since the fetus was having deformities, she underwent the procedure for Medical Termination of Pregnancy [MTP]. It is her case that the Applicant No.1 refused to take her to the matrimonial house unless he was paid the money for purchasing a flat. She went to reside with her parents and then lodged this FIR.
: 3 :
4.
The investigation is still going on, but, the parties have decided to settle their disputes. The Respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit. There is a reference to the settlement amount which she was to receive. It is stated before the Court that the entire amount is received by her. The affidavit mentions that she has no claim against the Applicants and that she was filing that affidavit supporting the application for quashing of these proceedings.
5.
The Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned counsel. The Respondent No.2 stated before the Court that she has no objection for quashing of the proceedings. She reiterated the contents of the affidavit. 6.
The dispute between the parties is purely personal in nature. They have settled their issues. They have decided to part ways. Continuation of the criminal proceedings will not serve any purpose. Therefore, we are inclined to allow this Application.
7.
Hence, the following order:
: 4 :
:: O R D E R ::
i. The FIR being C.R. No.171/2024 at Kalyan Taluka police station, District-Thane and the further proceedings are quashed and set aside.
ii. The Application is disposed of accordingly. ( S.M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Deshmane (PS)