SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sachin S/O. Narayan Dhawale And … vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police … on 18 April, 2017





1) Sachin s/o Narayan Dhawale
Aged about 32 years, occu: service

2) Narayan s/o Nilkanth Dhawale
Aged about 66 years, occu: Retired

Both R/o Plot No. 121, Besa Road
Sewadal Nagar, Manewada
Nagpur Tah. Dist. Nagpur. ..APPLICANTS

v e r s u s

1) State of Maharashtra
Police Station Officer
Police Station, Rajapeth,
Amravati, Tah Dist. Amravati.

2) Sneha w/o Sachin Dhawale
Aged about 28 years, occu: Household
R/o C/o Prakash Shastrakar
Deshpande Wadi, Shilangan Road,
Amravati, Tah. Dist.Amravati. ..RESPONDENTS


Mr. P.R.Agrawal, Advocate for the applicants
Ms. N.P.Mehta, Asst. Government Pleader for Respondent No.1
Mr. V.G. Jagirdar, Advocate for Respondent No.2

DATED : 18 April, 2017

::: Uploaded on – 21/04/2017 22/04/2017 00:41:16 :::



1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned counsel for

respective parties, by consent.

2. The applicants have filed this instant Application under section 482 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, for quashing and setting aside the First

Information Report No.520/2016, dated 13.07.2016, for offences punishable

u/ss. 498-A, 504, and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and

consequential Charge-sheet No.63/2017, pending before the learned Judicial

Magistrate, First Class, Amravati.

3. The applicant no.1 got married with respondent no.2 on 10.6.2015 at

Amravati, as per the Hindu rites and customs. A dispute arose between them

just three months after the marriage. Consequentially, the respondent no.2

filed a Petition u/s. 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act for grant of decree of nullity

of marriage in the Family Court, Nagpur, bearing No.A.303/2016. On

23.05.2016, the respondent no.2 filed an Application under the provisions of

the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, before the learned

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amravati. On 13.07.2016, the respondent no.2

lodged a complaint with Police Station, Rajapeth against the applicants, for

the offence punishable u/ss. 498A, 504, 506 r/ws. 34 of the I.P.C., vide Crime

No.520/2016. The charge-sheet came to be filed on 09.03.2017 in the Court

of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Amravati.

::: Uploaded on – 21/04/2017 22/04/2017 00:41:16 :::



4. The respondent no.2 filed an Application u/s. 24 of the Cr.P.C, before

this Court seeking transfer of Petition No.A.303/2016 pending before the

Family Court at Nagpur to the Family Court at Nagpur, vide Miscellaneous Civil

Application No.765/2016.

5. On 04.01.2017, this Court referred both the parties for mediation. The

matter was settled between the parties amicably. The parties arrived at an

agreement of settlement on 15.03.2017, inasmuch as the applicant nos. 1

and respondent no.2 decided to withdraw all the allegations instituted against

each other. It was decided that the applicant no.1 shall pay an amount of Rs.

7,50,000/- to the respondent no.2 towards full and final settlement of her

claim of permanent alimony and all other monetary claims. It was also agreed

that the respondent no.2 shall consent for withdrawal of the complaint

lodged by her against the applicants. In these circumstances, the applicants

requested to quash the FIR lodged against them by the complainant.

6. Both the parties along with their respective counsel are present before

the Court and they reiterate about the terms of settlement between the parties.

We have confirmed the identity of the parties from their respective counsel.

7. In the case of B.S.Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana another,

reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that when the

parties have settled their matrimonial dispute amicably, this Court could

exercise its powers u/s. 482 of the Cr.P.C., to give an end to the dispute.

::: Uploaded on – 21/04/2017 22/04/2017 00:41:16 :::



8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Yogendra Yadav others vs.

State of Jharkhand another, reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653, held that the

High Court can quash a criminal proceeding in exercise of its discretion any

power under section 482 of the Code having regard to the fact that the parties

have amicably settled their disputes and the victim has no objection, even

though the offences are non-compoundable.

9. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the

aforesaid judgments, the Application is allowed. Rule is made absolute in

terms of prayer (i) of the Application. However there shall be no order as to




::: Uploaded on – 21/04/2017 22/04/2017 00:41:16 :::

Leave a Reply

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

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