Shreekumar Pillai v. State Of Maharashtra Through Navghar Police Station

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.261 OF 2025 1.

Shreekumar S. Pillai Age : 42 Years, Occupation : Service, Address : Flat No.C-003, Ayodhya Darshan Co-op. Society, New Year Road, Dombivli, Thane : 421 201.

...Applicant No.1 by SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date:

2025.03.15 10:37:49 +0530 SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR 2.

Parvati S. Pillai Age : 75 Years, Occupation : Housewife, Address : Flat No.C-003, Ayodhya Darshan Co-op. Society, New Year Road, Dombivli, Thane : 421 201.

...Applicant No.2

Versus

The State of Maharashtra (Through Navghar Police Station) and Another.

...Respondents

***** Mr.Amit Maurya - Advocate for Applicants.

Mr.S.V.Gavand - APP for Respondent No.1 - State. Mr.Sagar Chandrakant Parab i/b. Mr.Harsh S. Trivedi - Advocate for Respondent No.2.

***** CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M.MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 10th MARCH 2025

P.C. :

1.

This is an Application for quashing of the F.I.R. registered vide C.R. No.175 of 2023 at Navghar Police Station under Sections 323, 34, 406, 498-A, 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC"). The F.I.R. was registered on 19th August 2023. Thereafter, the investigation was carried out and the charge-sheet is filed. Learned counsel for the Applicants produced copy of the charge-sheet for our perusal. The copy of the charge-sheet is taken on record.

2.

The F.I.R. was lodged by the Respondent No.2. The Applicant No.1 is her husband and the Applicant No.2 is her mother-in-law. The F.I.R. mentions that earlier the Applicant No.1 was working in the Indian Navy. In June-2005, she was working on a temporary job with the Indian Navy. At that time, they got acquainted. They got married on 28th December 2007 in the Court at Bandra. It was a registered marriage. They again got married on 30th April 2008 as per the Hindu rites. Both the families had consented to their marriage. The F.I.R. thereafter goes to mention various instances when on some occasions, the Respondent No.2 had helped the Applicant No.1 financially. The dispute arose as they did not have a child. Both

of them were taking treatment for that purpose. However, their situation worsened when according to the Respondent No.2, the Applicant No.1 had an extra-marital relationship with another person. In March-2023, both the Applicants left the house. While going, they took away the Respondent No.2's gold ornaments.

On these allegations, the F.I.R. is lodged.

3.

The charge-sheet contains the statements of the parents, a friend and an acquaintance of the Respondent No.2. They have supported the case of the Respondent No.2. But, the main allegations are made by the Respondent No.2. 4.

Now, the parties have settled their differences. They have executed the "consent terms". The Respondent No.2 has filed an "Affidavit of consent terms". She has specifically stated in the Affidavit that she has "No objection" for quashing of the F.I.R. which is the subject matter of this Application. The Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned counsel. She stated before the Court, that the matter is settled between the parties, and that she did

not want to proceed with the criminal prosecution. 5.

The dispute between the parties is purely personal in nature. The society at large is not involved. The parties have settled the matter. Continuation of the criminal prosecution will not serve any purpose. Therefore, we are inclined to allow this Application. Hence, following order:-

O R D E R

(i) The C.R.No.175 of 2023 registered with Navghar Police Station, and the consequent proceedings are quashed and set aside.

6.

With these observations, the Application stands disposed of.

(S.M.MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)