SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Hemant Vasant Wankhede And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 30 July, 2021

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

1/5 6-WP-3363-2017.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3363 OF 2017

Hemant Vasant Wankhede Ors. …Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra Anr. …Respondents

Mr. Dilip B. Shinde for Petitioners.
Mr. Rakesh Patil for Respondent No. 2,.
Respondent No. 2 is present through VC.
Mr. V.B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for State.

CORAM : S. S. SHINDE
N. J. JAMADAR, JJ.

DATE : 30th JULY, 2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT:

1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners prays

for leave to amend, so as to amend the prayer clause of the petition.

Leave granted. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the

consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. This petition is filed with following substantive prayer:-

A1) Be pleased to quash the FIR
lodged by the Respondent No. 2 vide
C.R. No. I-160/2017 registered with
Vithalwadi Police Station, Ulhasnagar
Under
Section 498(a), 406, 323, 504,
506 along with 34 of Indian Penal

Bhagyawant Punde

::: Uploaded on – 31/07/2021 31/07/2021 23:40:05 :::
2/5 6-WP-3363-2017.doc

Code as well as Regular Criminal Case
No. 336 of 2018 pending before the
Learned 7th Civil Judge, Junior
Division Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Ulhasnagar, arising out of above
referred FIR.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and 2 nd

respondent jointly submit that the parties have amicably resolved

the dispute and the 2nd respondent has no objection to quash the

impugned FIR and chargesheet.

5. Respondent No. 2 is present before this Court through

video conferencing. We have interacted with the 2 nd respondent. She

stated that it is her voluntary act to enter into amicable settlement

and give consent for quashing the FIR and chargesheet. 2 nd

respondent has also filed the affidavit. Para No. 3 and 4 of her

affidavit read as under:-

3. I further state and submit that,
thereafter, my parents and parents of the
Petitioner No. 1 set together and the
dispute of Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent
No. 2 is amicably settled between the
parties. I further say that, after filing of
abovementioned writ petition the Petitioner
No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 decide to take
mutually divorce filing marriage Petition
before the Civil Judge, Senior Division,
Kalyan and accordingly the Marriage
Petition No. 194 of 2019 was filed before
the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kalyan for
decree of Divorce. The abovementioned
Marriage Petition was allowed vide order

Bhagyawant Punde

::: Uploaded on – 31/07/2021 31/07/2021 23:40:05 :::
3/5 6-WP-3363-2017.doc

dated 30.12.2019, passed by the Civil
Judge, Senior Division, Kalyan and decree
of Divorce has been passed. I further state
that, now-a-days the we are staying
separately without any interference in life
of each other. I further state and submit
that, I have no objection for quashing of
FIR No. I-160 of 2017, registered with
Vitthalwadi Police Station, Ulhasnagar, on
26.5.2017 for the alleged offences Under
Section 498A, 406, 323, 504, 506 along
with 34 of Indian Penal Code on the basis
of complaint filed by me.

4. I further state and submit that,
dispute of Petitioners and Respondent No.
2 is amicably settled between the parties
and now both are staying separately
without any interference in life of each
other and therefore for the interest of both
the parties it is necessary to quash and
cancel the FIR No. I-160 of 2017,
registered with Vitthalwadi Police Station,
Ulhasnagar, on 26.5.2017 for the alleged
offences Under
Section 498A, 406, 323,
504, 506 along with 34 of Indian Penal
Code against the Petitioners. I further state
and submit that, by way of the present
affidavit I am giving free consent before
this Hon’ble Court for quashing of FIR No.
I-160 of 2017, registered with Vitthalwadi
Police Station, Ulhasnagar, on 26.5.2017
for the alleged offences Under
Section
498A,
406, 323, 504, 506 along with 34 of
Indian Penal Code against the Petitioner.

6. Since the parties have amicably resolved the dispute and

2nd respondent has given consent for quashing the FIR and

proceedings arising out of the same by way of filing an affidavit, no

fruitful purpose would be served by continuing the further

proceedings i.e. Regular Criminal Case No. 336 of 2018 pending

Bhagyawant Punde

::: Uploaded on – 31/07/2021 31/07/2021 23:40:05 :::
4/5 6-WP-3363-2017.doc

before the learned 7th Civil Judge, Junior Division Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Ulhasnagar arising out of C.R. No. I-

160/2017 registered with Vithalwadi Police Station, Ulhasnagar for

the offence punishable under Section 498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506

read with 34 of IPC.

7. The Supreme Court in the case of Giansingh v. State of

Punjab and Another1 has held that, the criminal cases having

overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil flavour stand on a

different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the

offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil,

partnership or such like transactions or the offence arising out of

matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the

wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have

resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, the High

Court may quash the criminal proceedings if in its view, because of

the compromise between the offender and the victim, the possibility

of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal

case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and

extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the

criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise

with the victim. It is further held that, as inherent power is of wide

1 2012 (10) SCC 303

Bhagyawant Punde

::: Uploaded on – 31/07/2021 31/07/2021 23:40:05 :::
5/5 6-WP-3363-2017.doc

plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in

accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz.: (I) to secure

the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any

court.

8. In view of discussion in foregoing paragraphs, to secure

the ends of justice and prevent the abuse of the process of Court,

the petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the writ petition is

allowed in terms of prayer clause (A1), which is reproduced in para

no. 3 of this order.

9. Rule made absolute to above extent. The writ petition

stands disposed of.

10. Parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order.

( N. J. JAMADAR, J.) (S. S. SHINDE, J.)

Bhagyawant Punde

::: Uploaded on – 31/07/2021 31/07/2021 23:40:05 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Copyright © 2022 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