1 apl731.17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 731 OF 2017
1. Gautam s/o. Bajirao Chavhan,
Aged about 48 years, Occ.
Service, r/o. Plot No.5/86,
Raghuji Nagar, Nagpur.
2. Savita d/o. Suryabhan Niratkar,
(@ Smt. Savita w/o. Ravi Chavre)
Aged about 38 years, Occ. Service,
r/o. Police Line Takli, Katol Road,
Nagpur. .......... APPLICANTS
// VERSUS //
State of Maharashtra,
Through Officer-In-Charge,
Police Station, Gittikhadan,
Tq. and Distt. Nagpur. .......... RESPONDENT
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2017 01:03:22 :::
2 apl731.17
____________________________________________________________
Mr.Nitin R. Bhishikar, Advocate for the Appellant.
Mr.A.M.Deshpande, A.P.P. for the Respondent/State.
____________________________________________________________
CORAM : R. K. DESHPANDE
AND
M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATED : 29th November, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per M. G. Giratkar, J) :
1. The Criminal Application is admitted and heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for the respective parties.
2. By the present application, both the applicants have prayed to quash Criminal Proceedings vide SCC No.1888/2013 pending before the learned 9 th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 385, 294, 506, 509 and 352 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Both the applicants have submitted that applicant no.1 is a dignified member of the Society. He is serving with Police department since the last 23 years and presently, he is posted with ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2017 01:03:22 ::: 3 apl731.17 SRPF Group 4, Nagpur. Applicant no.2 is serving with the Police department. At present, she is posted as a Clerk in the Office of Superintendent of Police, Katol Road, Nagpur. On 29.9.2011, applicant no.2 lodged the report against applicant no.1. After investigation, Summary Criminal Case No.1888 of 2012 is instituted against applicant no.1 before 9th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur.
4. Applicant no.2 alleged in the report that, in the year 2005, applicant no.1 was posted as a Clerk in the Office of Police Commissioner, Nagpur. Applicant no.2 was working at Police Control Room in Computer Section. By virtue of official work, applicant no.1 used to have contact with applicant no.2. He was required to visit at her Office frequently. It is alleged that cordial relations were developed between both the applicants. However, applicant no.1 tried to take undue advantage of the same. Allegedly, in the year 2009, one day, applicant no.1 met applicant no.2 near Ajni Railway Bridge, Nagpur. Applicant no.1 insisted applicant no.2 to accompany him for having a cup of coffee. Applicant no.2 accompanied applicant no.1. It is further alleged by applicant no.2 that, in spite of having coffee, applicant no.1 ordered cold drink and after consuming ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2017 01:03:22 ::: 4 apl731.17 the same, applicant no.2 started feeling giddy. Thereafter, applicant no.1 took applicant no.2 in his car to one room and tried to outrage her modesty.
5. Applicant no.2 also alleged that applicant no.1 was also demanding money from applicant no2 and was threatening and blackmailing her.
6. Applicant no.2 lodged report against applicant no.1 on 29.9.2011. Crime No.318 of 2011 came to be registered against applicant no.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 385, 294, 506, 509 and 352 of the Indian Penal Code.
7. It is submitted that the Authorities of Police Station, Gittikhadan completed investigation and submitted charge sheet against applicant no.1 on 23.1.2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 385, 294, 506, 509 and 352 of the Indian Penal Code.
8. Summary Criminal Case No.1888 of 2012 came to be registered in the Court of 9th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur. ::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2017 01:03:22 :::
5 apl731.17
9. Applicant nos. 1 and 2 have resolved their grievances by mutual discussion. Applicant no.2 does not intend to proceed with the complaint lodged by her. Applicant no.1 is now aged about 48 years and is having two children aged about 13 and 8 years. The daughters of applicant no.1 are suffering from Sickle Cell disease. During the intervening period, there has been discussion amongst the family members of applicant nos. 1 and 2. On the request of family members of applicant no.1, both the parties have removed their grievances.
10. Both the applicants have submitted that now they have removed all the misunderstanding between them by mutual discussion. Applicant no.2 is leading a happy marital life. Her children are also grown up. She does not intend to proceed further with the complaint lodged by her against applicant no.1.
11. It is submitted that offences punishable under Sections 294 and 385 of the Indian Penal Code are non-compoundable and therefore, the applicants have approached this Court to quash the Criminal proceedings.
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2017 01:03:22 :::
6 apl731.17
12. Today, both the applicants are present with their Counsel Mr.Nitin Bhishikar. We have asked applicant no.2 about her grievance. She has stated before us that, due to misunderstanding, report was lodged against applicant no.1. In view of mutual settlement between applicant nos. 1 and 2, keeping the Criminal case pending is nothing but abuse of process of Court. Other offences are compoundable. But offences punishable under Sections 294 and 385 of the Indian Penal Code are not compoundable. Looking to the settlement between applicant no.2 and applicant no.1, applicant no.2 will not depose against applicant no.1. There is no possibility of termination of the Criminal proceedings into conviction. Hence, in view of the Judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and Others vs. State of Punjab and Others, (2014) 6 SCC 466, we are inclined to allow the application. Hence, we pass the following order.
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2017 01:03:22 :::
7 apl731.17
// ORDER //
The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (i) thereof, which reads as under :
(i) Quash the criminal proceedings vide SCC No.1888/2013 pending before the learned 9th Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur for the offences under Section 354, 385, 294, 506, 509, 352 of I.P.C. "
No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
[jaiswal]
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2017 01:03:22 :::
8 apl731.17
::: Uploaded on - 04/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 05/12/2017 01:03:22 :::