SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Nadira Begum W/O. Mohammad … vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police … on 5 April, 2018

1 wpl1018.17.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1018 OF 2017

1. Nadira Begum w/o. Mohammad
Salauddin Khan, Aged 63 years,
Occ. Household, r/o. 117, Sector-
11E, DLF, Faridabad, Haryana.

2. Mohammad Salauddin Khan s/o.
Mohammad Jamaluddin Khan,
Aged 66 years, Occ. Nil,
r/o. 117, Sector-11E, DLF,
Faridabad, Haryana.

3. Nazima Abid w/o. Mohammad
Abid Nasser, Aged 40 years,
Occ. Household, r/o. Upper
Fort, Aligarh. ………. PETITIONERS

// VERSUS //

1. State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Frezapura Police Station,
Amravati.

::: Uploaded on – 09/04/2018 10/04/2018 01:20:54 :::
2 wpl1018.17.odt

2. Afiya Mirza Ex. W/o. Arif Khan,
Aged 34 years, Occ. Advocate,
r/o. “Atiya”, Modern Colony,
Camp, Amravati. ………. RESPONDENTS

Mr.A.A.Sambaray, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr.S.M.Ghodeswar, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1/State.
Mr.R.J.Mirza, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

CORAM : B.R.GAVAI
AND
M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.

DATED : 5TH APRIL, 2018.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R.Gavai, J) :

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by

consent.

2. The petitioners, who are parents and sister of Mohd. Arif

Khan, have approached this Court for quashing and setting aside

Criminal Case No.222 of 2016 arising out of Crime No.218 of 2014

for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 406 and 506

r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Respondent no.2 herein

::: Uploaded on – 09/04/2018 10/04/2018 01:20:54 :::
3 wpl1018.17.odt

and Mr.Mohd. Arif Khan were married to each other on 12.2.2012 at

Amravati. After the marriage, respondent no.2 went to live with her

husband and his parents – petitioner nos. 1 and 2.

3. However, it appears that, after the short period, there

arose differences between respondent no. 2 and her husband.

Though efforts were made to reconcile, it did not yield any result.

The husband of respondent no.2 has already pronounced divorce by

Talaq Deed on 28.7.2014. When the matter was listed before this

Court, taking into consideration that the dispute was basically a

matrimonial dispute between the respondent no.2 and the petitioner,

we had suggested the parties to explore the possibility of mediation.

Accordingly, the dispute was referred to mediation of

Mr.S.Y.Deopujari, learned Government Pleader vide order

dt.28.3.2018.

4. With the efforts taken by learned Mediator, the matter

has been amicably settled between the parties and the Compromise

deed/Memorandum of understanding has been placed on record by

the parties. The same is taken on record and marked as “X” for

identification. Perusal of the deed would reveal that all the disputes

::: Uploaded on – 09/04/2018 10/04/2018 01:20:54 :::
4 wpl1018.17.odt

between the parties have been amicably settled. It has been agreed

that the husband of petitioner namely Mohd. Arif Khan would pay an

amount of Rs.Seven Lakhs to the respondent no.2 towards full and

final settlement. Demand Draft No.104358, dt.5.4.2018 has already

been handed over by the learned Counsel for the petitioners to the

learned Counsel for respondent no.2.

5. The Apex Court in the case of B.S.Joshi and Others vs.

State of Haryana and another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675 has

held that if the matrimonial dispute has been settled between the

parties, this Court can exercise powers under Section 482 of the

Criminal Procedure Code to quash and give an end to the criminal

proceedings. We find that the present case is a fit case where this

Court should exercise powers under Section 482 of the Criminal

Procedure Code and give an end to the criminal proceedings.

6. In that view of the matter, we find that, in addition to

giving an end to the proceedings which are subject matter of present

petition, in order that the parties live their life peacefully, it will be

just and proper to give an end to the Criminal proceedings pending

between the parties. In the result, rule is made absolute by quashing

::: Uploaded on – 09/04/2018 10/04/2018 01:20:54 :::
5 wpl1018.17.odt

and setting aside a) Regular Criminal Case No.222 of 2016 pending

on the file of 7th Joint Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) and J.M.F.C., Amravati

and b) First Information Report registered by Police Station,

Frezarpura, Amravati vide Crime No.218 of 2014 for the offences

punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 406 and 506 r/w. Section 34

of the Indian Penal Code.

7. Needless to state that the aforesaid order is subject to

realisation of the aforesaid amount of Rs.7,00,000/-.

8. We express our appreciation to Mr.S.Y.Deopujari,

learned Government Pleader for giving an end to this litigation in a

shortest possible period.

JUDGE JUDGE

[jaiswal]

::: Uploaded on – 09/04/2018 10/04/2018 01:20:54 :::
6 wpl1018.17.odt

::: Uploaded on – 09/04/2018 ::: Downloaded on – 10/04/2018 01:20:54 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2018 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 to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh