SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vishnu S/O. Januji Sardar vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., … on 25 June, 2019

1apl874.18

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATBOMBAY,
NAGPURBENCH,NAGPUR.

CRIMINALAPPLICATION(APL)NO.874/2018

1.VishnuS/oJanujiSardar
Agedabout51yrs.,Occ.Agriculture

2.Nandaw/oVishnuSardar
Agedabout44yrs.,Occ.Household

No.1and2R/oMilindNagarPatur,
Tah.Patur,District-Akola.

[email protected]/oSukhdevraoSardar
Agedabout38yrs.,Occ.Agriculture

4.Sau.JayashreeSunilSardar
Agedabout35yrs.,Occ.Household

5.Anils/oSukhdevraoSardar
Agedabout35yrs.,Occ.Agriculture

No.3to5R/oShirla,Tah.Patur,
DistrictAkola

6.Kailass/oSuryabhanPawar
Agedabout52yrs.,Occ.Agriculture

7.Sau.Sunitaw/oKailasPawar
Agedabout40yrs.,Occ.Household

8.Swapnils/oKailasPawar
Agedabout21yrs.,Occ.Education

No.6to8R/oWaghjali,Tah.Barshitakli,
Dist.Akola
….APPLICANTS

:::Uploadedon-27/06/201927/06/201923:05:58:::
2apl874.18

VERSUS

1.StateofMaharashtra
throughPoliceStationOfficer,
PoliceStation,Patur,Dist.Akola.

2.Asmitaw/oKamleshSardar
Agedabout32yrs.,Occ.Service,
R/o.Govt.PoliceQuarters,Yeoda
Tah.Daryapur,District-Amravati

3.Kamleshs/oSukhdevraoSardar
Agedabout36yrs.,Occ.Service

4.Tulsabaiw/oSukhdevraoSardar
Agedabout60yrs.,Occ.Nil

5.Sukhdevraos/oJanujiSardar
Agedabout65yrs.,Occ.Nil

AllR/oSamtaNagar,KhanapurRoad,
Patur,Tah.Patur,District-Akola
…NON-APPLICANTS
__

ShriA.M.Tirukh,Advocateforapplicants
ShriS.A.Ashirgade,A.P.P.forrespondentno.1/State
ShriD.V.Mahajan,Advocateforrespondentno.2
ShriBadalLonareand
ShriS.B.Gandhi,AdvocatesforRespondentnos.3to5
__

CORAM:-P.N.DESHMUKHAND
SMT.PUSHPAV.GANEDIWALA,JJ.

DATED:-25/06/2019

ORALJUDGMENT(SectionPerSmt.PushpaV.Ganediwala,J.):

Rulereturnableforthwith.Heardfinallybyconsent.

:::Uploadedon-27/06/201927/06/201923:05:58:::
3apl874.18

2.Inthisapplication,theapplicants1to8andnon-
applicants3to5againstwhomtheF.I.R.isregisteredatPoliceStation
Patur,Dist.AkolavideCrimeNo.127/2018fortheoffencepunishable
underSection498-AreadwithSection34ofIndianPenalCode,sought
quashingofthesaidFirstInformationReport.

3.WehaveheardShriTirukh,learnedCounselforthe
applicants,ShriAshirgade,learnedA.P.P.fortheState,ShriMahajan,
learnedCounselforrespondentno.2andShriLonare/ShriGandhi,
learnedCounselforrespondentnos.3to5.

4.Attheoutset,non-applicantno.2/wifeinheraffidavitin
replysubmitsthatthematrimonialdisputebetweennon-applicantno.
2andherhusband-KamleshSukhdevraoSardarhasbeenamicably
settledbeforetheCourtofCivilJudge,SeniorDivision,Akoladuring
thependencyofthedivorcepetitionbetweentheparties.Nowshedoes
notwanttoproceedwithhercomplaint.

5.BoththepartiesinpersonarepresentbeforetheCourt.We
havepersonallyinquiredwiththemandconfirmedaboutthesame.In
suchcircumstancesandinviewofthejudgmentoftheHon’bleApex
CourtinthecaseofB.S.JoshiandOthersVs.StateofHaryanaand
anotherreportedin(2003)4SCC675,whereinitisheldthatwhere
partieshavesettledtheirmatrimonialdispute,thisCourtshould
exercisepowerunderSection482oftheCodeofCriminalProcedureto
giveanendtotheCriminalproceedings,wefindthatcontinuationof
CriminalProceedingswouldunnecessarilycreateproblemin
maintainingharmonyintheirfamilylives.Inparanos.14and15ofthe
caseofB.S.Joshi(Supra),itisobservedthat:

:::Uploadedon-27/06/201927/06/201923:05:58:::
4apl874.18

“14.ThereisnodoubtthattheobjectofintroducingChapterXX-A
containingSection498-AinSectiontheIndianPenalCodewastoprevent
torturetoawomanbyherhusbandorbyrelativesofherhusband.
Section498-Awasaddedwithaviewtopunishingahusbandandhis
relativeswhoharassortorturethewifeofcoerceherorherrelatives
tosatisfyunlawfuldemandsofdowry.Thehypertechnicalviewwould
becounterproductiveandwouldactagainstinterestsofwomenand
againsttheobjectforwhichthisprovisionwasadded.Thereisevery
likelihoodthatnon-exerciseofinherentpowertoquashthe
proceedingstomeettheendsofjusticewouldpreventwomenfrom
settlingearlier.ThatisnottheobjectSectionofChapterXX-AoftheIndian
PenalCode.

15.Inviewoftheabovediscussion,weholdthattheHighCourtin
exerciseofitsinherentpowerscanquashcriminalproceedingsorFIR
orcomplaintandSection320oftheCodedoesnotlimitoraffectthe
powersunderSection482oftheCode.”

Inviewofsettledlegalposition,weareinclinedtopassthe
followingorder:
ORDER

i)Criminalapplicationisallowed.

ii)FirstInformationReportregisteredagainst
applicantsandrespondentnos.3to5videCrimeNo.127/2018forthe
offencepunishableunderSection498-AreadwithSection34ofIndian
PenalCodeisquashedandsetasideonapplicantnos.1to8and
respondentnos.3to5depositingcosts.

:::Uploadedon-27/06/201927/06/201923:05:58:::
5apl874.18

iii)Applicantnos.1to8andrespondentnos.2to5

shalldepositjointlycostsofrupeestwenty-fivethousandwiththe
RegistryofthisCourtwithinthreeweeksfromtoday.Ondepositingthe
same,amountshallbeforwardedtoPoliceWelfareFund,Akola.

6.Ruleismadeabsoluteintheaforesaidterms.Noorderas
tocosts.

JUDGEJUDGE

D.S.Baldwa

:::Uploadedon-27/06/201927/06/201923:05:58:::

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