Paras Praful Gogri And ANR v. Purnima Paras Gogri @ Purnima Ishwar Mandaviya And ANR

: 1 :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 174 OF 2025

1. Paras Praful Gogri

2. Harsha Praful Gogri

3. Alka Hitesh Gangar .....Applicants

Versus

1. Purnima Paras Gogri

2. The State of Maharashtra .....Respondents ----- Dr. Samarth Shrikant Karmakar a/w Adv. Supriya Arun Pandey i/by Karmarkar and Associates - Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. Rajkumar Yadav - Advocate for Respondent No. 1. Mr. S. V. Gavand - APP for the Respondent-State. ----- CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 21st FEBRUARY 2025 P.C. :

1.

This is an application for quashing of the F.I.R. registered vide C.R. No. 49 of 2020 dated 24.02.2020 at Charkop Police Station under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

The charge-sheet is filed, and the case is pending vide C.C. No. 2476/PW/2021 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, 24th Court, Borivali, Mumbai. The prayer is made for quashing of Digitally signed by SEEMA KSHITIJ YELKAR Date:

2025.02.27 11:07:02 +0530 SEEMA KSHITIJ YELKAR

: 2 :

those proceedings as well.

3.

The F.I.R. is lodged by the Respondent No. 1. The Applicant No. 1 is her husband. The Applicant No. 2 is his mother. The Applicant No. 3 is his sister. The F.I.R. is lodged on 24.02.2020. The Respondent No. 1 has stated she got married with the Applicant No. 1 on 23.05.2019. It was a love marriage. At that time, her parents had given her gold ornaments. Even the Applicant No. 2 gave her some ornaments. However, the Applicant No. 2 wanted more gold ornaments. Therefore, she asked the Respondent No. 1 to bring gold ornaments worth Rs. 6 Lakhs from her parents and on that ground all the Applicants started ill treating and harassing her. The F.I.R. goes on mentioning different instances wherein all the Applicants had ill-treated and harassed her. The Respondent No. 1 was suffering from gallbladder stones, but the husband did not pay any attention, and she had to undergo surgery with the help of her parents. On these allegations, the F.I.R. is lodged. The charge-sheet contains the statements of the parents and sister of the Respondent No. 1. Their allegations are similar.

4.

After all this, now the matter is settled between the Parties. The Respondent No. 1 has filed her affidavit in the Court. She has

: 3 :

stated that she has no objection for quashing of these proceedings as the matter is settled. She is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned Counsel. She reiterated the statement made in the affidavit. She stated before the Court that she has no objection for quashing of these proceedings.

5.

The dispute between the Parties is purely personal in nature. The society at large is not involved. The continuation of these criminal proceedings will not serve any purpose. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the application. Hence, the following Order:-

ORDER

(i) The Criminal Application is allowed.

(ii) The F.I.R. registered against the present Applicants vide C.R. No. 49 of 2020 at Charkop Police Station, Mumbai under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the consequent proceedings bearing C.C. No. 2476/PW/2021, pending before JMFC, 24th Court at Borivali, Mumbai are quashed and set aside.

6.

Accordingly, Criminal Application is disposed of. (S.M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)