SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Gajanan S/O. Raghunath Adhav And … vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 25 July, 2018

CrApln 1880 18J.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1880 OF 2018

1) Gajanan s/o Raghunath Adhav,
Age 30 years, Occ. Service,
R/o. Pathri, Tq. Phulambri,
Dist. Aurangabad.

2) Kausalyabai w/o Raghunath Adhav,
Age 56 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. Pathri, Tq. Phulambri,
District Aurangabad. … Applicants
(Original Accused)
VERSUS.

1) The State of Maharashtra.

2) Manisha w/o Gajanan Adhav,
Age 25 years, Occ. Service,
R/o. Pathri, Tq. Phulambri,
District Aurangabad. … Respondents.
(Respondent No. 2
is Orig. Complainant)

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Ghanekar Nilesh S.
APP for Respondent No. 1 : Mrs. D.S. Jape.
Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. U.S. Patil.

CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE
K. L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE : 25th JULY, 2018

JUDGMENT ( PER COURT : T.V. NALAWADE) :

Mkd 1/3

::: Uploaded on – 26/07/2018 27/07/2018 02:01:59 :::
CrApln 1880 18J.odt

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2. By consent heard both sides.

3. Application is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure for quashing of proceedings of Sessions Case No. 273/2017
pending in the Court of Sessions Judge, Aurangabad. The case is filed
for the offences punishable under section 307, 498A etc., read with
section 34 of the Indian Penal Code by respondent No. 2, who is the
wife of applicant No. 1. Applicant No. 2 is mother of applicant No. 1.

4. The parties have filed terms of settlement of the dispute. The
affidavit filed by the wife/respondent No. 2 shows that she resumed
cohabitation. She has submitted that relief needs to be given to the
applicants as she has resumed cohabitation and she wants to live
peaceful life with her husband.

5. In view of the contents of the affidavit and the facts of
settlement, this Court holds that nothing can be achieved by directing
the applicants to face the trial for the aforesaid offences.

6. In the result, the application is allowed in terms of prayer
clause ‘B’. Rule is made absolute in those terms. Identification of
parties is done by the respective counsels.

7. Criminal Application is disposed of.

(K. L. WADANE, J.) (T.V. NALAWADE, J.)

Mkd 2/3

::: Uploaded on – 26/07/2018 27/07/2018 02:01:59 :::
CrApln 1880 18J.odt

Mkd 3/3

::: Uploaded on – 26/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 27/07/2018 02:01:59 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation