The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's exercise of inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the FIR and proceedings based on an amicable settlement between the parties, in line with the principles laid down by the Apex Court.

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh S. Patil, J.

1. This application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing First Information Report vide C.R. No.389/2020 registered at Bhagyanagar Police Station, Nanded for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

FACTS : -

2.1 The marriage of respondent no. 2 with applicant no. 3 was solemnized on 22.12.2019 as per Hindu rites and customs at Satvachan Mangal Karyalaya, Nagpur. They have no issue from the said wedlock.

2.2 It is the case of respondent no. 2 in the FIR that, the respondent no. 2 is a B.E. Computer Engineer. On 28.07.2019, the engagement ceremony of respondent no. 2 with applicant no. 1 took place at Nanded. As decided, the father of respondent no. 2 had transferred online Rs. 4.00 lakhs in the account of father of applicant no. 3 and thereafter cash amount of Rs. 8.00 lakhs with golden ring of two tolas was given. After the marriage, the respondent no. 2 had gone to her matrimonial house and within two days thereafter, she had returned her parental home at Nanded. Thereafter, her husband had come to Nanded to take her back to her matrimonial home at Nagpur. After residing with the applicants in a common shelter at Nagpur, respondent no. 2 and applicant no. 3 left for Gurugram in Haryana and started residing there in a rented room.

2.3 The respondent no. 2 has made serious allegations in the FIR against all the accused persons. When the respondent no. 2 realized that the efforts of conciliation were not bearing any fruits, she filed complaint/report against all the applicants in the police station. Accordingly, FIR was registered.

2.4 The applicants have filed the present criminal application challenging the FIR bearing Crime No. 389/2020 challenging therein that all the allegations made in the FIR are false and there was no demand of money. Since the marriage between respondent no. 2 and applicant no. 3 did not work out, the respondent no. 2 has filed the FIR out of vengeance. The allegations made therein are baseless and vague. Hence, the FIR requires to be quashed and set aside.

SUBMISSIONS : -

3. Heard Mr. P. M. Nagargoje, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. R. V. Dasalkar, learned APP for respondent no. 1/State and Mr. H. D. More for respondent no. 2.

4. At the outset, learned counsel for the applicants points out to this Court that the respondent no. 2 has filed a notarized affidavit dated 27.10.2021 stating therein that there has been amicable settlement between the present applicants and respondent no. 2. There was a meeting between two families and it was decided therein to file an application for mutual divorce. Learned Principal Judge of the Family Court, Nanded has passed decree of divorce on 11.10.2021 and now the applicant no. 3 and respondent no. 2 are not husband and wife. In view of the said amicable settlement, respondent no. 2 by filing affidavit has given consent to quash the FIR registered against the applicants.

5. The submissions advanced by learned counsel Shri. P. M. Nagargoje on behalf of the applicants are also countenanced by Shri. H. D. More, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 and learned APP for respondent no. 1 / State.

ANALYSIS : -

6. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Apex Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases like the instant one, by observing as under:-

"61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings."

7. The aforesaid dictum sta