SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Bom) 1471

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AURANGABAD BENCH
V.K. Jadhav, Sandipkumar C.More, JJ.
Shaikh Taslim Shaikh Hakim - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Application No. 166 of 2022
Decided On : 29-03-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr.Shaikh Wajeed Ahmed, Advocate, for the Appellant, Mr.S.S. Dande, App, Mr.Samir Shaikh, Advocate, for the Respondent.

The court applied the guidelines for quashing criminal proceedings based on settlement and interpreted the Muslim Personal Law to declare the marriage status as dissolved by mutual consent.

Headnote:

QUASHING - MATRIMONIAL DISPUTE - Indian Penal Code, section 498(A), 323, 504, 506 - Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, section 2 - Family Courts Act, 1984, section 7(1)(b) - Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act - Madras High Court case - Guidelines for quashing criminal proceedings - Interpretation of Muslim Personal Law

Fact of the Case:

The applicant seeks quashing of FIR and charge-sheet as the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement after getting separated by mutual consent and declaring their status in the Family Court. The respondent received maintenance and is not interested in prosecuting the applicant.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the parties had voluntarily settled and approached the Family Court for declaration of their status. The court applied the guidelines for quashing criminal proceedings based on settlement and interpreted the Muslim Personal Law to declare the marriage status as dissolved by mutual consent.

Issues: Quashing of FIR and charge-sheet, application of Muslim Personal Law, voluntary settlement of parties

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the guidelines for quashing criminal proceedings based on settlement and interpreted the Muslim Personal Law to declare the marriage status as dissolved by mutual consent.

Final Decision: The Criminal Application was allowed and disposed of in favor of the applicant.

ORDER

1. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsels for the parties at the admission stage.

2. The applicant/accused is seeking quashing of FIR bearing Crime No.514 of 2021, registered with Police Station Nanalpeth, Parbhani for the offences punishable under sections 498(A), 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and also consequential charge-sheet bearing RCC No. 178 of 2022, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parbhani, on the ground that the parties have arrived at amicable settlement.

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant - husband and respondent No.2 - wife got separated by mutual consent and accordingly approached the Family Court, Parbhani for declaration of their matrimonial status in terms of provisions of section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 read with section 7(1)(b) Explanation (b) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. By judgment and order dated 09.03.2022 learned Judge of the Family Court at Parbhani had allowed the petition and declared their status as they are no more husband and wife in terms of the mutual agreement between them. It is further agreed between the parties that the applicant-husband shall pay an amount of Rs.5 lakhs to respondent No.2 as the amount for future maintenance in total. Learned Counsel for respondent No.2 submits that respondent No.2 has filed consent affidavit-in-reply and she also received said amount of Rs.5 lakhs. Learned Counsel for respondent No.2 submits that respondent No.2 is not interested in prosecuting the applicant in connection with aforesaid crime and continue with the criminal proceedings arising out of said crime.

4. We have heard learned APP for the respondent/State. Learned APP Mr. Dande has placed before us a case of Madras High Court in C.R.P.(NPD) No.161 of 2021, wherein the Madras High Court by referring the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Mst. Zohara Khatoon Vs. Mohd. Ibrahim, (1981) 2 SCC 509, submits that mubarat is a form of extra-judicial divorce based on mutual consent under Islamic Law and same is valid, as it remains untouched by the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act. The Madras High Court in para No. 17 of the judgment as made following observations :-

"17. Coming to the present case on hand, the learned Principal District Munsif, Alandur has refused to entertain the petition in the light of provisions under Order VII Rule 11(d) of CPC and the Judgment of High Court of Karnataka in Miscellaneous First Appeal No.200834/2019(FC) [Zuber Vs. Mahezabeen] and the same is challenged in the present revision. It appears that the petitioner filed O.S. before the learned Principal District Munsif at Alandur to declare that the Marriage solemnized between the petitioner and respondent on 01.12.2018 to be dissolved in terms of MOU entered between them. However, the same was returned several times for want of several reasons and thereafter, the said petition was dismissed even without numbering the petition. As already mentioned supra, the Hon'ble Division Bench of High Court of Kerala at Ernakulaam, had categorically held that 'mubaraat' is a form of an extra-judicial divorce based on mutual consent under Islamic law and same is valid, as it remains untouched by the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act. The court below, in such circumstances, is neither called upon to adjudicate nor called upon to dissolve the marriage by decree of divorce. On the other hand, the Family Court only has to declare the maritial stauts by endorsing the mubaraat invoking jurisdiction under Explanation (b) of Section 7(1) of the Family Courts Act. Once a declaration of joint divorce invoking bubaraat is produced before the Family Court, the Family Court has to pass a decree declaring the matrimonial status of the parties. The inquiry in such cases is limited to the extent to find out whether both parties have agreed upon to dissolve such marriage invoking mubaraat. Once the Family Court is satisfied that

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top