SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Syed Firozuddin S/O. Syed … vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. The … on 13 March, 2019

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

Criminal Writ Petition No. 1125 of 2018

Petitioners : 1) Syed Firozuddin Syed Hamiduddin, aged about

39 years, Occ: service

2) Syed Hamiduddin son of Sayeeduddin, aged about

70 years, Occ: Retired

3) Syed Mumtaz w/o Syed Hameeduddin, aged

about 69 years, Occ: Household

All residents of 41, Farook Nagar, Teka, Nagpur

versus

Respondents : 1) State of Maharashtra, through the Police

Station Officer, Police Station, Pachpaoli, Nagpur

2) Shenaz Taji d/o Farhat Taji, aged about 35

years, Occ: service, resident of 103, Aman Symphony,

Ayyappa Nagar, Mankapur Ring Road, Nagpur

Shri R. S. Akbani, Advocate for petitioners

Shri Trupti Udeshi, APP for respondent no. 1

Shri A. M. Haque, Advocate for respondent no. 2

::: Uploaded on – 15/03/2019 15/03/2019 23:24:35 :::
2

Coram : Sunil B. Shukre
Smt Pushpa V. Ganediwala, JJ

Dated : 13th March 2019

Oral Judgment (Per Sunil B. Shukre, J)

1. Rule. Heard forthwith by consent of parties.

2. Petitioners no. 1 and 3 are absent. Petitioner no. 3 is

suffering from cancer and as informed by the learned counsel for the

petitioner, she has been taken to Bangalore by her son who is petitioner

no. 1 for consulting an oncologist there who has given appointment for

today. Petitioner no. 2, father of petitioner no. 1 and father-in-law of

respondent no. 2 is personally present before the Court. Respondent no.

2 is also personally present before the Court. They have been duly

identified by their respective counsel.

3. Parties personally present before the Court submit that there

has been amicable settlement in between them and as per the settlement

deed dated 3.4.2018 (page 11), Respondent no. 2 has agreed to

withdraw all the allegations made against her husband and in-laws and

accordingly has given her consent for quashing of the crime registered

against the petitioners vide crime no. 322/2016 for the offence

punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal

Code at Police Station, Panchpaoli, Nagpur. The dispute between the

parties is purely a private dispute and has no societal ramifications. In

::: Uploaded on – 15/03/2019 15/03/2019 23:24:35 :::
3

such a case, settled law would require us to make interference by invoking

the power under Section 482 Cr. P. C. If this is not done, any further

proceedings in the matter would be nothing but an exercise in futility and

would be an abuse of process of law.

4. In the result, petition is allowed. Crime no. 322/2016 for

the offence punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code at Police Station, Panchpaoli, Nagpur against the

petitioners and all other consequential actions are hereby quashed and

set aside including charge-sheet no. 18/2019 filed in the concerned Court.

5. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

SMT PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J

joshi

::: Uploaded on – 15/03/2019 15/03/2019 23:24:35 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2019 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh