Sunny Gauriprasad Modi v. Aparna Sunny Modi

: 1 :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 522 OF 2025

1. Sunny Gauriprasad Modi

2. Geeta Gauriprasad Modi

3. Arati Gauriprasad Modi

4. Pooja Raju Panalkar Nee Pooja Modi

5. Hiralal Jagdishprasad Modi .....Applicants

Versus

1. Aparna Sunny Modi

2. The State of Maharashtra .....Respondents ----- Ms. Namrata S. Bobade - Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. G. J. Jain - Advocate for the Respondent. Mr. J. P. Yagnik - APP for the Respondent-State. ----- CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 08th MAY 2025 P.C. :

1.

This is an application for quashing of the proceedings pending vide PW/290/2023 before the 27th JMFC Court Mulund, Mumbai arising out of C.R. No. I-420 of 2022 registered at Navghar Police Station, Mumbai under Sections 323, 498-A, read with 34 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

Digitally signed by SEEMA KSHITIJ YELKAR Date:

2025.05.09 15:40:31 +0530 SEEMA KSHITIJ YELKAR

: 2 :

2.

Heard learned Counsel Ms. Bobade for the Applicant, learned Counsel Shri Jain for the Respondent No. 1 and learned APP Shri Yagnik for the Respondent No. 2-State.

3.

The F.I.R. is lodged by the Respondent No. 1. She has stated that she came in contact with the Applicant No. 1 in the year 2018. The Applicant No. 2 is the mother of the Applicant No. 1. The Applicant Nos. 3 and 4 are his sisters and the Applicant No. 5 is his uncle. The informant and the Applicant No. 1 developed friendship, and then they fell in love. They decided to get married. They got married on 20.05.2022. It was a registered marriage. The mother-inlaw of the Applicant No. 2 suggested that instead of taking her to the matrimonial house immediately, she would be taken after the marriage was performed as per the rites before their relatives. Therefore, the informant continued residing at her parents' house. The F.I.R.

thereafter goes on to mention the different efforts to stay in a rented place, but the efforts failed and the informant continued to reside at her parents' house. The demand was made for atleast 10 to 15 lakhs for performing their marriage. All this dispute ultimately led to filing of the F.I.R..

: 3 :

allegations in the F.I.R..

4.

Now the dispute is settled between the Parties. The Respondent No. 1 has filed her affidavit mentioning that it was a love marriage but after the marriage, the quarrels started between the parties which resulted into increased differences between them. She had also filed petition for restitution of the conjugal rights and under the provision of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. But the disputes are now settled, and she has stated that she has no objection for quashing of these proceedings. 5.

The Respondent No. 1 is present in the Court. She is identified by her learned Counsel. She reiterated the averments in the affidavit. She stated before the Court that she has no objection for quashing of these proceedings.

6.

The dispute between the parties are purely personal in nature. The society at large is not involved. Therefore, proceedings can be quashed.

7.

Therefore, we are inclined to allow the petition. Hence, the following order:-

: 4 :

ORDER

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed.

(ii) The F.I.R. registered vide C.R. No. I-420 of 2022 registered with Navghar Police Station under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the consequent proceedings pending before the 27th JMFC Court Mulund, Mumbai vide CC No. PW/290/2023 are quashed and set aside.

8.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (S.M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)