1 jg.apl 628.17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
Criminal Application (APL) No. 628 of 2017
(1) Ashish S/o Rambhau Ware
Aged about 23 years, Occ : Education,
R/o. Fule Nagar, Pathardi,
Tah. Pathardi, District Ahmednagar.
(2) Rahul S/o Bapu Tupe
Aged 21 years, Occ. Labour,
R/o. Male Babhulgaon,
Tah. Pathardi, District Ahmednagar.
(3) Ketan Sahebrao Khade,
Aged about 20 years, Occ : Education,
R/o. Sainathnagar, Pathardi,
Tah. Pathardi, District Ahmednagar.
(4) Hanuman S/o Vijay Pardeshi,
aged about 24 years, Occ : Labour,
R/o. Chichpur, Pathardi,
Tah. Pathardi, District Ahmednagar.
(5) Bhujang Sampatrao Garje,
aged about 35 years, Occ : Agriculturist,
R/o. Akola, Tah. Pathardi,
District Ahmednagar.
(6) Ramdas S/o Bhanudas Andhale,
aged about 35 years, Occ. Agriculturist,
R/o. Jirewadi, Tah. Pathardi,
District Ahmednagar. .... Applicants
// Versus //
(1) State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Digras,
District Yavatmal.
.....2/-
::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2017 01:13:49 :::
2 jg.apl 628.17.odt
(2) Sou. Bhosena @ Mohasina Bano Bano Mohd. Jalil,
Aged about 40 years, Occ. Household
R/o. Kalgaon, Tah. Digras,
District Yavatmal. .... Non-applicants
Shri R. J. Shinde, Advocate for the applicants
Shri P. S. Tembhare, Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant
no. 1
Shri M. Jadhao, Advocate for the non-applicant no. 2
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND
M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATE : 12-09-2017.
JUDGMENT (Per : M. G. GIRATKAR, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The criminal application is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The applicants prayed to quash and set aside the charge- sheet filed by the non-applicant no. 1 for the offence punishable under Sections 364-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is submitted that the complainant lodged the report against the applicants alleging that husband of the non-applicant no. 2 was kidnapped by the applicants. It is also alleged that husband of the complainant taken amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- from the applicant no. 5 for providing labour but the complainant has not provided labour for Sugar .....3/-
::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2017 01:13:49 :::
3 jg.apl 628.17.odt Factory. Therefore, the applicants kidnapped husband of the
complainant. On her report, Crime/First Information Report (FIR) No. 158/2015 was registered. The non-applicant no. 1 filed the charge-sheet before the Court.
4. The non-applicant no. 2 - complainant appeared with her counsel. She has stated in presence of her counsel that due to misunderstanding, she lodged the report. The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the proceedings pending.
5. The learned counsel for the non-applicant no. 2 submitted that the parties have settled the matter out of the Court and the non- applicant no. 2 is not desirous to prosecute the applicants, therefore, charge-sheet pending before the Sessions Court at Darwha be quashed and set aside.
6. It is clear from the submissions of the applicants and non- applicant no. 2 with their respective counsel that they have settled the matter out of the Court. The complainant has decided not to prosecute the applicants, therefore, it is clear that she will not depose against the applicants and there is no possibility of any conviction. Hence, in view of .....4/-
::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2017 01:13:49 :::
4 jg.apl 628.17.odt the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and anr. (2014) 6 SCC 466, charge-sheet pending before the District and Session Judge, Darwha vide Sessions Trial No. 35/2016 is hereby quashed and set aside. Order accordingly.
JUDGE JUDGE
wasnik
...../-
::: Uploaded on - 14/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2017 01:13:49 :::