Bombay High Court
Somanath @ Sagar S/O Tulshiram Bawale ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 4 July, 2018
Author: T.V. Nalawade
Bench: T.V. Nalawade
1 Application 1116 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Criminal Application No.1116 of 2018
1) Somanath @ Sagar s/o Tulshiram
Bawale,
Age 28 years, Occupation: Service,
R/o Bori-Paradhi, Taluka Daund,
District Pune.
2) Tulshiram @ Tulshidas s/o Raosaheb
Bawale,
Age 65 years, Occupation: Labour,
R/o Bori-Paradhi, Taluka Daund,
District Pune.
3) Aasha w/o Tulshiram Bawale,
Age 62 years, Occupation: Labour,
R/o Bori-Paradhi, Taluka Daund,
District Pune.
4) Vishal s/o Tulshiram Bawale,
Age 23 years, Occupation: Labour,
R/o Bori-Paradhi, Taluka Daund,
District Pune.
5) Shrikant s/o Dagadu Gapat,
Age 42 years, Occupation: Service,
R/o Indapur, Taluka Washi,
District Osmanabad
At present Kailash Nagar,
Thergaon,
Taluka and District Pune.
6) Vaishali w/o Shrikant Gapat,
Age 36 years,
Occupation Household,
R/o Indapur, Taluka Washi,
District Osmanabad
At present Kailash Nagar,
Thergaon,
Taluka and District Pune. .. Applicants.
::: Uploaded on - 09/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 10/07/2018 00:57:18 :::
2 Application 1116 of 2018
Versus
1) The State of Maharashtra
Through the Police Inspector,
Police Station, Washi,
District Osmanabad.
2) Ramesh S/o Bhanudas More,
Age 49 years,
Occupation: Agriculture,
R/o Sarola, Taluka Washi,
District Osmanabad. .. Respondents.
----
Shri. Sushant B. Choudhari, Advocate, for applicants.
Shri. M.M. Nerlikar, Assistant Government Pleader, for
respondent No.1.
Shri. S.G. Kawade, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
----
Coram: T.V. NALAWADE &
K.L. WADANE, JJ.
Date: 04 JULY 2018
JUDGMENT (Per T.V. Nalawade, J.):
1) Rule, rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard both the sides for final disposal.
2) The proceeding is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of F.I.R. No.22 of 2018 registered with Washi Police Station, District Osmanabad for offences punishable under sections 3 and ::: Uploaded on - 09/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 10/07/2018 00:57:18 ::: 3 Application 1116 of 2018 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. F.I.R. was given by present respondent No.2, father of the girl and he has made allegations that engagement ceremony took place on 19- 11-2017 with applicant No.1 and on 17-2-2018 the applicant declared that the engagement was broken and they will not go ahead with the marriage. It is contended that there was demand of dowry which included cash amount and four wheeler and as the first informant was not in a position to meet this demand, the applicants refused to go on with the marriage.
3) Today, affidavit of the first informant came to be filed to inform the Court that the parties have settled the dispute and the marriage of the daughter of the first informant has taken place. He has given no objection for giving relief claimed. In view of nature of dispute and the averments made in the affidavit this Court holds that relief needs to be granted. In the result, the application is allowed. Relief is granted in terms of prayer clause (C). Rule made absolute in those terms.
Sd/- Sd/-
(K.L. WADANE, J.) (T.V. NALAWADE, J.)
rsl
::: Uploaded on - 09/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 10/07/2018 00:57:18 :::