When parties have settled the matter,criminal proceeding should not be continued

It is submitted that in view of the settlement
arrived, now the proceedings in the said case for which the
applicant no.2 is not desirous, would be only an empty ordeal.
Having regard to the aforesaid and considering true

import of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. as explained by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in decision in the case of Manoj Sharma .vs.
State reported in 2009 ALL MR (Cri) 267 (SC) further
clarifying ratio in decision in case of B. S. Joshi .vs. State of
Haryana reported in AIR 2003 Supreme Court 1386, it
does appear that allowing the continuance of the criminal
proceedings in the Court in spite of the parties having arrived
at settlement will be an ordeal amounting to the abuse of the
process of law.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.433 OF 2013
Mukthar Ahmad s/o Mohd. Yasin,

.. Versus ..
State of Maharashtra, t
CORAM : P.D. KODE, J
DATED : JULY 19, 2013



By this joint petition, the applicants
have prayed
for quashing the charge sheet and R.C.C. No.1865/2012
arising out of the said charge sheet and pending in the Court
of 3rd Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur.
The said case
has arisen out of Crime No.154/2011 registered upon the
report lodged by applicant no.2 for offence under Section
498-A of I.P.C. against applicant no.1 with Lakadganj Police
The petition is founded on the basis of the

4.
Station.
contention of the settlement having arrived in between the
parties and during the said settlement the parties amongst
other have agreed to dissolve their marriage as per the
custom prevailing in the Muslim community and the applicant
no.2 having agreed to put an end to all the proceedings
against the applicant no.1.
5.
Mr.
Muzammil
Hussain
learned
counsel
for
applicant no.1 and Ms. Deepti Mendhekar, learned counsel for
applicant no.2 jointly submitted that in accordance with terms
of settlement arrived at in between the parties, the divorce
has taken place and an amount of Rs.6 lacs towards
permanent alimony has been agreed to be paid, out of which
cheque for Rs.3 lacs towards first instalment has already
been given to applicant no.2. In view of the said submission,

applicant no.2 kept present before the Court by her counsel
upon whose complaint the proceedings sought to be quashed,
were initiated, was asked regarding the correctness of the
said statement and thereon she submitted statements made
being correct and furthermore herself being not desirous of
continuing the said proceedings against the applicant no.1.
6.
The learned counsel for the applicants further submitted
proceedings.
has
necessitated
to
file
the
present

compoundable,
that the offence under Section 498-A of I.P.C. being not
It is submitted that in view of the settlement
arrived, now the proceedings in the said case for which the
applicant no.2 is not desirous, would be only an empty ordeal.
Having regard to the aforesaid and considering true
7.
import of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. as explained by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in decision in the case of Manoj Sharma .vs.
State reported in 2009 ALL MR (Cri) 267 (SC) further
clarifying ratio in decision in case of B. S. Joshi .vs. State of
Haryana reported in AIR 2003 Supreme Court 1386, it
does appear that allowing the continuance of the criminal
proceedings in the Court in spite of the parties having arrived
at settlement will be an ordeal amounting to the abuse of the
process of law.
8.
In view of the same, Criminal Application No. 433 of

2013 is allowed. Having regard to the fact of parties having
settled the matter, charge sheet arising out of Crime No.
154/2011 and case arising out of said crime pending on the
file of 3rd Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court, Nagpur, for
offence under section 498-A I.P.C. is hereby quashed and
result thereof applicant no.1 is acquitted for said offence.
Bail bonds executed by applicant and his surety, if any, stand
Rule made absolute in the above terms.
JUDGE

Print Page