KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2839 OF 2022 1. 2 v. State of Maharashtra ..... ] ] ] & Ors.

Mr. Sujeet G. Kurup (through V. C.), Advocate for Petitioners. Mr. Anand S. Shalgaonkar, A.P.P., for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 – State. Mr. Shankar Katkar i/b Manisha Devkar, Advocate for Respondent No.4. ..... SHAILAJA SHRIKANT HALKUDE SHRIKANT HALKUDE PER COURT : CORAM : ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. DATE : AUGUST 20, 2026

1. Heard Mr. Kurup, learned Advocate for the Petitioners, Mr. Shalgaonkar, learned A.P.P, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 – State and Mr. Katkar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.4.

2. The Petitioners have invoked Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “Cr. P. C.”), to quash the First Information Report bearing C.R.No.384 of 2021 registered on 13th November, 2021 with Karkamb Police Station, District Solapur (for short, “F.I.R”) and filing of the Charge-sheet pursuant to the said F.I.R, bearing No. 2 of 2022, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Shailaja 8-WP-2839-2022.odt Pandharpur (for short, “Magistrate”) against the Petitioners for the offences punishable under Section 498-A, 323, 504, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “I.P.C.”).

3. On Perusal of the record, it appears that this Court, by order dated 24.06.2024, granted the ‘Rule’ and the proceedings before the learned Magistrate have been stayed. Also, it appears that during the pendency of the Petition, it was dismissed and then restored.

4. Learned Advocates for the Petitioners as well as the learned Advocate for Respondent No.4 have jointly submitted that the matter has been settled between the parties before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pandharpur. Accordingly, they have filed Consent Terms. As per the terms and conditions of the said Consent Terms, the parties have applied for divorce by mutual consent and have accordingly obtained the Divorce Decree pursuant to the said Consent Terms. As per the conditions of the said Consent Terms, Petitioner No.1 has paid Rs.12,75,000/- towards permanent alimony to Respondent No. 4, which Respondent No. 4 has accepted. Respondent No. 4, who is present before the Court, has admitted receipt of the said amount. As per Condition U (in Marathi, U), the parties have agreed to withdraw all proceedings filed against each other unconditionally. Pursuant to the said compromise, Respondent No.4, who is present before the Court, has filed an Affidavit dated 20th August 2026 stating that, pursuant to the mutual consent, Shailaja 8-WP-2839-2022.odt she has consented to the quashing of F.I.R. No.384 of 2021 and Charge-sheet No. 2 of 2022 filed pursuant to the said F.I.R. Her statement is accepted. The Affidavit filed by Respondent No. 4 is taken on record.

5. Learned Advocates appearing for the Petitioners as well as Respondent No.4 submitted that, in view of the Consent Terms and the Affidavit filed by Respondent No.4, F.I.R. bearing No. 384 of 2021, and the charge-sheet bearing No.2 of 2022 filed pursuant thereto (Which was registered as R.C.C. No.36 of 2022 pending before the learned J.M.F.C, Pandharpur) be quashed.

6. I have perused the record, Consent Terms filed before the learned C. J. S. D., as well as the Affidavit filed by Respondent No.4. It appears that, initially, on 13th November 2021, Respondent No.4 lodged a report against the Petitioners, alleging that they had subjected her to cruelty and caused ill-treatment to her on account of a demand for dowry. Pursuant to the said report, an offence was registered against the Petitioners vide C.R. No.384 of 2021. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed and numbered as R.C.C. No. 36 of 2022. The said proceeding is presently pending before the learned Magistrate.

7. It further appears that the matter has been settled between the parties before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pandharpur and pursuant to that, they agreed to withdraw all the proceedings filed against Shailaja 8-WP-2839-2022.odt each other and pursuant to it, Respondent No.4, who is present in the Court filed an affidavit consenting to quash C.R. No.384 of 2021 and R.C.C. No.36 of 2022 pending before the learned Magistrate against the Petitioners.

8. Respondent No.4 is present before the Court and stated about settlement as referred to above. She admits the contents of the Compromise Deed/Consent Terms and the Affidavit.

9. Having considered the above facts and circumstances, in my view, Respondent No.4–complainant does not wish to prosecute the case further. In view of this, the chances of conviction are very remote, as the complainant is not likely to support the prosecution’s case. Moreover, the parties have amicably settled their matrimonial dispute. Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.4 are young and are pursuing their respective work.

10. In the wake of the above peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the parties have settled their dispute and the complainant has given her no objection to quashing of the F.I.R. and the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate, I deem it appropriate to exercise the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr. P. C. / Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. This Court is vested with inherent powers to secure the ends of justice. There are no such limitations on the exercise of these powers. In the present case, the peculiar facts show that neither party wishes to continue with the prosecution; in Shailaja 8-WP-2839-2022.odt particular, the complainant has given her no objection to quashing the F.I.R. and the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate. Moreover, the nature of the offence is neither heinous nor anti-social, but the same arises out of the marital dispute. It is worth noting that the law is meant to secure justice, not to disrupt people's lives. Thus, in my view, there is no reason to continue with the prosecution. As such, I am inclined to exercise the inherent powers of this Court to quash the F.I.R. and the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate.

11. As a result, the Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b).

12. Consequently, the F.I.R. bearing No.384 of 2021, and the charge-sheet bearing No.2 of 2022 filed pursuant thereto, which was registered as R.C.C. No.36 of 2022, pending before the learned J.M.F.C, Pandharpur, against the Petitioners are hereby quashed and set aside.

13. The Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No order as to costs.

14. The Petition is disposed of. (ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) Shailaja