HARSHADA RAHUL KOMALKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

(3.) The applicants and non applicant No.2 all are personally present before the Court and they are identified by their respective counsel. Both of them submit that there is an amicable settlement reached in between them voluntarily, whereby they have agreed to withdraw all the criminal complaints and counter complaints filed against each other by them. They also submit that the reason for their settlement is the settlement reached between Harshada Rahul Komalkar i.e. applicant No.1 and her husband Rahul Uttamrao Komalkar and that they wish to live harmonious and peaceful life ahead. Considering the fact that there has now been amicable settlement between the parties and also the fact that now the parties have buried all their differences and wish to live a normal and harmonious life ahead and also the fact that the basis of he allegations made in the First Information Report in question is a private dispute between the parties, we are of the opinion that this application can be allowed on the basis of the amicable settlement reached between the parties. Accordingly, the application is allowed in terms it 's prayer clause which reads as under:-