Advocates:
['KAWADE SHRIKANT G', 'COPY SERVED ON PP', '', 'Deshmukh R T']

1

cran 14.2021.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.14 OF 2021

CHANGDEV SHIVDAS MULE AND OTHERS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

...

Advocate for Applicants : Mr.Kawade Shrikant G.

APP for Respondents: Mr. M M Nerlikar

Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. Deshmukh R.T

...

CORAM : V.K. JADHAV & SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, JJ.

Dated: December 16, 2021

…

PER COURT :-

1.

Heard fnalll with consent at admission staee.

2.

The applicants/orieinal accused are seekine

quashine of the FIR bearine crime no.512 of 2020

reeistered with Ambajoeai Citl police station, District

Beed for the offence punishable under section 498-A,

323, 505, 506, 34 of the IPC. Further, durine the

pendencl of the application, charee-sheet came to be

submitted and bl carrline out the amendment

applicants are also seekine quashine of the proceedines

bearine RCC No.114 of 2021 pendine before the Judicial

aaa/-

2

cran 14.2021.odt

Maeistrate First Class, Ambajoeai, on the eround that

parties have arrived at amicable settlement.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that

thoueh co-accused husband of respondent no.2 is not

one of the applicants before the Court, however, the

matter has been amicabll settled between the

respondent no.2 and co-accused/husband.

4.

Learned counsel for respondent no.2 submits that

respondent no.2 has fled her affdavit to that effect.

Respondent no.2/wife has initiated the criminal

proceedines under the provisions of Section 12 of the

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

bearine D.V. application no.541 of 2020 before J.M.F.C,

Ambajoeai, District Beed aeainst her husband and in

laws and in terms of the compromise arrived at between

the parties, she had withdrawn the said application on

6.10.2020. Learned counsel submits that respondent

no.2 and co-accused husband have amicabll settled the

matter and decided to live separatell bl dissolvine the

marriaee after obtainine a decree of divorce bl mutual

aaa/-

3

cran 14.2021.odt

consent from the competent court. Thus, respondent

no.2/wife and co-accused husband have fled the

petition bearine HMP No.179 of 2021 for mutual divorce,

which is pendine before C.J.S.D. District Beed. Learned

counsel submits that, even co-accused/husband has

aereed to pal an amount of Rs.3.00 lacs alonewith 10

tola 5 erams of eold and also household articles eifted to

her bl her parents at the time of marriaee towards the

permanent alimonl and full and fnal settlement

between the parties. Same has aereed to be eiven after

decree of divorce is obtained.

5.

We have carefulll eone throueh the contents of the

affdavit fled bl respondent no.2. It appears that co-

accused husband and respondent no.2 have aereed to

settle the dispute amicabll and thel now have decided

to live separatell bl dissolvine their marriaee. Thel

have also fled H.M.P. no.179 of 2021 before the C.J.S.D.

Ambajoeai for a decree of divorce bl mutual consent.

Further, care has also been taken to pal certain amount

towards the permanent alimonl. In view of the same, it

aaa/-

4

cran 14.2021.odt

appears to us that parties have arrived at amicable

settlement, voluntarill.

6.

In the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and

others, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Supreme

Court in para 48 has quoted para 21 of the judement of

the fve-Judee Bench of the Punjab and Harlana Hieh

Court delivered in Kulwinder Singh Vs. State of

Punjab (2007) 4 CTC 769. A fve-Judee Bench of the

Punjab and Harlana Hieh Court, in para 21 of the

judement, bl placine reliance on the various judements

of the Supreme Court, has framed the euidelines for

quashine of th