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

2025 Supreme(Bom) 1037

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY : NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
NITIN W. SAMBRE, M.M. NERLIKAR, JJ.
 
Akshay, s/o Rammilan Pal – Applicant
Versus 
The State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Beltarodi Police Station, Nagpur and Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Application [APL] No.900 of 2025 With Criminal Application [APL] No.290 of 2025 With Criminal Application [APL] No.441 of 2025 
Decided On : 08-07-2025
 

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicants :Mr. S.P. Sonwane, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. S.M. Ukey, A.P.P., Mr. J.B. Gandhi, Advocate.

Inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC may quash FIRs in matrimonial disputes when mutual consent is present, despite non-compoundable offences, to prevent injustice.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 498-A, 377 - Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3 and 4 - Quashing of FIR - Parties entered into a memorandum of understanding to settle matrimonial disputes - Consent of informant acknowledged - Court emphasized that inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC can quash proceedings when continuance may lead to oppression - Factors considered include nature of offences and mutual consent of parties. (Paras 8, 10, 19)

(B) Matrimonial Disputes - Courts encouraged to facilitate amicable resolutions and discourage multiplicity of litigation arising from marital discord. Court allowed for quashing where likelihood of conviction is remote and injustice would ensue from continuing the proceedings. (Paras 11, 18)

Facts of the case:
The informant lodged a complaint against the applicants alleging offences under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act, stating after marriage, there was harassment and demands from the in-laws. The marriage occurred on 15.05.2023, and parties later sought to quash the FIR based on mutual consent following a divorce by mutual consent.

Findings of Court:
FIR and criminal proceedings were quashed in light of the settlement and after confirming the informant's consent.

Issues: Main issues included the nature of offences which are non-compoundable and the appropriateness of quashing charges amidst mutual settlements.

Ratio Decidendi: Court identified the unique nature of matrimonial disputes and maintained that if efforts to uphold the marriage have failed, it should be a priority to end such disputes amicably to avoid societal harm.

Result: Applications allowed, FIR quashed.

Table of Content
1. details of the first information report and allegations. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. quashing applications based on mutual consent. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. informant's consent and interaction with the court. (Para 8 , 9)
4. court's power to quash non-compoundable offences. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. justification for quashing proceedings in matrimonial disputes. (Para 13 , 14)
6. encouraging settlements in matrimonial conflicts. (Para 15 , 16)
7. impact of marital discord on societal well-being. (Para 17 , 18)
8. conclusion and order to quash the fir. (Para 19)

JUDGMENT :

(M.M. NERLIKAR, J.)

Heard. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and by consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties, matters are taken up for final disposal.

2. The informant [Non-applicant No.2] in the present matters has lodge a complaint with non-applicant no.1 Beltarodi Police Station, Nagpur on 18.12.2023, which came to be registered as First Information Report No.737/2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 4 98-A, 377 read with Section 3 4 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The said first information report is registered against all the applicants. Applicant in Criminal Application No.900/2025 is husband of the informant, while applicant in Criminal Application No.290/2025 are sisters namely - Kavita Pal and Shweta Pal of husband and applicant in Criminal Application No.441/2025 is maternal aunt of husband. On the basis of the complaint so lodged, the prosecution has carried out investigation and on completion of the same, has filed charge sheet before the competent Court of law, which has been registered as R.C.C.No.2514/2024 and is pending before the 11th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur.

3. The prosecution case in short is that – marriage between the informant and applicant – Akshay was solemnized on 15.05.2023 at Nagpur. The informant has alleged that at the time of marriage her father has given valuable gifts to her husband which includes gold ornaments, motor cycle, motor car etc. It is further alleged that the father of informant had incurred expenses to the tune of Rs.20 lakhs in the said marriage.

4. After marriage the informant went to her matrimonial house, where on 16.05.2023 her sister-in-law had taken some golden ornaments from her stating that the same belongs to her. They alleged certain things against her father on the count of not giving certain items in the marriage and entered into unwanted debate. The informant has alleged that her husband was in the habit of drinking liquor. It is further alleged that two sisters of applicant Akshay was also harassing the informant. It is also alleged that the applicant Akshay was forcefully doing unnatural sex with the informant, due to which she has sustained some injuries to her private part. It is further alleged that so far as Rajkumari Pali is concerned, who is maternal aunt, she demanded 5 Acres of land and 2 BHK flat. It is alleged that the sister-in-law Shewta has tried to hack the mobile of the informant through some third person. Based on these allegations the first information report for the offence as stated above, came to be registered.

5. All these three criminal applications are being filed for quashing of the first information report and consequential criminal proceedings arising therefrom, which is pending before the Joint Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur. The said relief is prayed on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties.

6. The learned Counsel appearing for the applicants submitted that parties have settled their dispute before the Family Court by entering into a memorandum of understanding/consent terms, and based on that, a consent decree was passed in respect of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13[B] of the SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT . However, the decree of divorce is not placed on record, and the reason canvassed for not placing the same

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