1 3.APL.1513-2025.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1513 OF 2025 ( Sumit Sharad Jejani & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra, Thr. Police Station Officer, Police Station Sitaburdi, Nagpur & Anr. ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. N.P. Singhnia, Advocate for the Applicants. Ms. Sneha Dhote, APP for the Non-applicant No.1/State. Mr. S.R. Poddar, Advocate for the Non-applicant No.2. CORAM: URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED : 14th OCTOBER, 2025 1. The present Application is preferred by the Applicants for quashing of the FIR in connection with Crime No.284/2024 registered with Police Station, Sitaburdi, Nagpur for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. The crime is registered on the basis of the report lodged by the Informant/Non-applicant No.2 on an allegation that her marriage was performed with the Applicant No.1 on 06.06.2023. After marriage she resumed the cohabitation at the house of the present Applicants but she was not treated well and she was subjected for physical and mental cruelty. 2025:BHC-NAG:10995-DB 2 3.APL.1513-2025.odt On the basis of the said report Police have registered the crime against the present Applicants. 3. During the pendency of this Application, both the parties arrived at a settlement and the settlement terms are filed before the Family Court, Nagpur. As per the settlement terms, they have decided to obtain the degree of dissolution of marriage. In view of that, they prayed for quashing of the FIR. 4. Heard learned Counsel for the Applicants. The parties are verified as per the settlement terms are concerned and they have agreed to the settlement terms. 5. Perused the entire investigation papers. The FIR came to be lodged due to the matrimonial dispute between the parties and considering that the matter is already amicably settled between the parties and the settlement terms are already filed before the Family Court, Nagpur. 6. At this stage, the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, wherein the Court observed that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled, although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored, securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. In this regard, a 3 3.APL.1513-2025.odt specific reference was made to offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or a family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim but the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable. The High Court may, within the framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated. 7. In addition to that, in the case of Naushey Ali Vs. State of U.P. reported in (2025) 4 SCC 78, the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that the proceeding with the trial, when the parties have amicably resolved the dispute, would be futile and the ends of justice require that the settlement be given effect to by quashing the proceedings. It would be a grave abuse of process particularly when the dispute is settled and resolved. 8. In view of the above observations and considering that the criminal law is set in motion on the basis of the report lodged, the entire Police machinery have spared their time for the investigation of the said crime as well as the Court has also spared the time, therefore the Application deserves to be allowed subject to the cost. In view of that, we proceed to pass the following order. 4 3.APL.1513-2025.odt O R D E R i. The Application is allowed. ii. The First Information Report bearing Crime No. 284/2024 registered with Police Station, Sitaburdi, Nagpur for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and the consequent proceedings arising out of the same bearing R.C.C. No.2950/2024 pending before the 6th Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Nagpur are hereby quashed and set aside, subject to the cost of Rs.20,000/- by the Applicants and Rs. 20,000/- by the Non-applicant No.2 to be paid to the High Court Gazetted Officers Association, Nagpur and the compliance be reported to this Court. 9. Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. (NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) SD. Bhimte