Shubhada S Kadam

12 wp 4774.2021.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 4774 OF 2021

Mr. Bhagyaraj Periswamy Devendra and ors.

….Petitioners

Versus

Mrs. Vennila Bhagyaraj Devendra and anr.

….Respondents

Mr. Shrinivas C. Singh, advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Shweta Singh, advocate for respondent No.1.

Ms. M. H. Mhatre, APP for the State.

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE &

SURENDRA P. TAVADE, JJ.

DATE : 18^th FEBRUARY, 2022.

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel and learned APP appearing for the

respective parties.

2.

The petitioners are before this Court seeking quashment of

FIR No.423 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A,

406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and FIR No.421 of

2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 509, 323, 506 of the

Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered with Juhu Police Station against the

petitioners as well as Case No.2880/PW/2018 arising out of FIR No.421

of 2018 pending before Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 10^th Court at

Andheri, Mumbai.

1/3

SHUBHADA

SHANKAR

KADAM

Digitally signed

by SHUBHADA

SHANKAR

KADAM

Date:

2022.02.24

17:03:29 +0530

Shubhada S Kadam

12 wp 4774.2021.doc

3.

Perusal of the copies of the said FIRs, which are placed on

record, show that there was a discord between the petitioner No.1 -

husband and respondent No.1 - wife and at one point of time, the

petitioner - husband was desirous of parting way with respondent No.1-

wife and had filed proceedings for divorce. Post filing of the FIRs in the

Police Station as well as during the pendency of the proceedings before

the competent court and during pendency of the petition filed in this Court,

petitioner No.1 and respondent No.1 settled their dispute amicably and

post lodgement of the FIRs, for a period of two years, the couple was

residing under same roof along with their children and presently, also the

couple is residing under one roof.

4.

Respondent No.1 -wife is present before this Court. On query

put to her, she submitted that there is positive change in the behaviour of

petitioner No.1 and she is having no grievance against him or his family

members anymore. She reiterated that she and her husband – petitioner

No.1 are residing under the same roof along with their children and

leading a harmonious matrimonial life. Respondent No.1 further submitted

that she has no objection if the aforesaid FIRs and proceedings arising

therefrom are quashed and set-aside.

5.

Considering the above facts, we are of the opinion that the

continuity of the FIRs and the proceedings would be nothing but an act of

futility. The offences alleged against the petitioners are not involving any

2/3

Shubhada S Kadam

12 wp 4774.2021.doc

social element and the dispute is an outcome of matrimonial discord. In

these circumstances and especially in view of the law laid down by the

Apex Court in the case of B.S.Joshi versus State of Haryana AIR 2003

SC 1386, we are of the view that quashing of the FIRs as well as criminal

proceedings would be in the interest of respondent No.1. Besides, no

purpose would be served by keeping the FIRs. and criminal proceedings

pending except burdening the Criminal Courts which are already

overburdened. In that view of the matter and, in the interests of justice,

the FIRs and the proceedings arising therefrom are required to be

quashed and set-aside. The petition is, accordingly, made absolute in

terms of prayer clause (a) which reads thus :

“(a) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash

and set-a -side a F.I.R. Bearing No. 423 /2015 for

offence punishable U/s. 498-A, 406 r/w 34 of the

Indian Penal Code lodged at Juhu Police Station

on 09/10/2015 by the respondent no 1 and also

case no. 2880/pw/2018 arising out of FIR

no.421/2018 for offence punishable u/s 509,323

and 506 of the IPC pending before Ld. MM 10^th

court at Andheri, Mumbai