Bombay High Court
Sheikh Mohd. Mohsin Jamal And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through The ... on 15 March, 2016
Author: B. R. Gavai
Bench: B. R. Gavai, A. S. Chandurkar
apl684.15
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH
NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 684 OF 2015
1] Sheikh Mohd Mohsin Jamal
aged 37 yrs. Occu. L.I.C. Business.
2] Asma Anjum, aged 26 yrs.
Occu. Household.
R/o Ayesha Vila in front of
Gajanan Traders, Ganpati Nagar
Plot No. 36, Godni Road, Nagpur.
At present residing at Near
Mankapur Police Station Opposite
Zingabai Takli Nagpur. APPLICANTS.
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra
through Police Station Gittikhadan
Nagpur. RESPONDENT.
Shri A. J. Khan, Counsel for the applicants.
Shri M. K. Pathan, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent.
CORAM: B. R. GAVAI AND
A. S. CHANDURKAR JJ.
Dated : MARCH 15, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per B. R. Gavai J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
2] The applicants who are husband and wife have approached this Court by filing application for quashing and setting aside the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 2866 of 2015 pending before the 10 th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur.
3] The applicants were married to each other on 29.01.2012. The ::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 09:04:57 ::: apl684.15 2 applicants have been blessed with two children. However, it appears that there were some quarrels between the applicants and as an outcome of the said quarrel, the applicant no.2 had lodged first information report for offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. After the investigation the charge sheet came to be filed which came to be converted into above said criminal case.
4] However, it appears that due to passage of time wisdom appears to have prevailed upon them and they have decided to end their differences and also decided in the interest of both as well as in the interest of children to reside together.
5] The applicants are personally present in the Court along with their minor children reiterating their settlement.
6] The Apex Court in the case of B. S. Joshi and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana & Anr. Reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675 has held that, if the parties arrive at settlement in a matrimonial dispute, then the Court should exercise powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to give an end to the criminal proceedings.
7] We find that this is a fit case to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to give an end to the criminal proceedings in terms of settlement arrived at between the parties.
Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (1).
JUDGE JUDGE ::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 09:04:57 ::: apl684.15 3 ig ::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 09:04:57 :::