Bombay High Court
Jadda Singh Antarlal Nat vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 20 April, 2016
Bench: Naresh H. Patil
wp1089-15
sas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1089 OF 2015
Jaddasingh Antarlal Nat,
Age: 45 years, A/p. Bhavar, Tal.
Bhavar, Dist. Ajmer, Rajasthan ..Petitioner.
V/s.
1.
State of Maharashtra,
through the Colaba police
Station, Mumbai
2. Istiaq Ahmed Basir Ahmed Mir,
Age: 26 years, Service, R/o. Plot
No.201, Kazi Building No.2, Ismail
Colony, Nal Bazaar,Paidhuni,Mumbai.
3. Manoori Ramroop Nat,
Age: 25 years, A/p. Bhavar,Tal. Bhavar,
District Ajmer, Rajasthan.
4. Geeta Ramesh Nat,
Age: 35 years, A/p. Bhavar,Tal. Bhavar,
District Ajmer, Rajasthan.
5. Bhuri Suresh Nat,
Age: 25 years, A/p. Bhavar,Tal. Bhavar,
District Ajmer, Rajasthan.
1/6
::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 23:00:04 :::
wp1089-15
6. Parshi Sahebsingh Nat,
Age: 40 years, A/p. Bhavar,Tal. Bhavar,
District Ajmer, Rajasthan.
7. Ruby Sajjansingh Kanjar,
Age: 30 years, A/p. Bhavar,Tal. Bhavar,
District Ajmer, Rajasthan. ..Respondents.
Mr.Pandit Kasar for the petitioner.
Mrs.M.M. Deshmkh, APP for the respondent-State.
CORAM :
NARESH H.PATIL AND A.M.BADAR, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 13TH APRIL, 2016
PRONOUNCED ON : 20TH APRIL, 2016
JUDGMENT (PER A.M.BADAR, J.)
1. By this petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner / accused is praying
for quashing and setting aside the F.I.R. bearing No.4/2014 for
offences punishable under section 457, 380, 511 read with 34
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered against him on the
basis of the F.I.R. lodged by Police Naik Mohan Shivaji Patil on
4th January, 2014 with Colaba police station, Mumbai.
wp1089-15
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. By taking
us through the entire charge-sheet annexed to the petition, he
vehemently argued that there is no iota of evidence against
the present petitioner and as such, the F.I.R. so also the
resultant charge-sheet and criminal case against the
petitioner needs to be quashed and set aside. According to
the learned counsel for the petitioner, informant / Police Naik
had seen five women sitting in front of shop named and styled
as International Currency Exchange India Pvt. Ltd. in the night
intervening between 3rd Janary, 2014 and 4th January, 2014.
After apprehending those five women, suspected them to be
thieves, F.I.R. in question came to be registered and during
investigation, the present petitioner has been arraigned as an
accused when their being no evidence against him.
3. As we could not find any prima facie evidence
against the present petition in the charge-sheet annexed by
him to the petition, we had requested learned APP to furnish
photocopy of the entire set of charge-sheet in the matter of
F.I.R. No.4/2014 registered with Colaba police station. Learned
APP furnished the photocopy of the charge-sheet No.6/2014
wp1089-15
arising out of F.I.R. bearing No.4/2014 registered with the
Colaba police station, Mumbai for the offences punishable
under section 457, 380, 511 read with 354 of the Indian Penal
Code.
4. We have heard learned APP for the State.
5. Perused the charge-sheet placed on record by both
the parties. According to the prosecution case, as reflected
from the charge-sheet, during patrolling in the area of police
station, Colaba in the night intervening between 3 rd January,
2014 and 4th January, 2014, police squad headed by Police
Naik - Mohan Shivaji Patil / informant found that five women
were sitting in front of shop known as International Currency
Exchange India Pvt. Ltd. in suspicious condition and it was
revealed that they were trying to enter inside the shop by
pulling out the shutter. Charge-sheet reveals that those five
women were apprehended from the spot itself and offence
came to be registered. During the course of investigation, spot
panchanama came to be recorded and the Investigating
Officer recorded statements of several witnesses, including
Mayur Kokan, Nilesh Bhagale, Smt.Shanti Kanjar, Ramesh
wp1089-15
Kokate, Ramesh Gawli, Rupesh Raut, Shrikant Karkar and
Vinayak Desure. Most of them are official witnesses. According
to the prosecution case, accused ladies were attempting to
commit theft and lurking house trespass in the night. Perusal
of the entire charge-sheet does not reveal any allegations
against the present petitioner Jaddasingh Nat. He is not
named by any witness nor any overt act is attributed to him
in the entire charge-sheet. As such, even if the entire charge-
sheet is accepted as it is, then also, no material could be
found indicting the present petitioner in the crime in question.
Thus, neither the F.I.R. nor the evidence collected in support of
the same by the prosecution disclose commission of any
offence by the present petitioner. As such, making him stand
the rigor of trial would certainly amount to abuse of process of
the Court and, therefore, for securing the ends of justice,
inherent powers of this Court needs to be invoked for
quashing the proceedings qua the present petitioner.
6. Though the petitioner has also prayed for awarding
compensation for wrongful detention, during the course of
hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner made a statement
that now the petitioner is not interested in any compensation
wp1089-15
and he is not pressing prayer clause (c).
7. In the result, the petition is allowed. F.I.R. bearing
No.4/2014 and consequential charge-sheet No.6/2014
resulting in Criminal Case No.683/PW/14 qua the present
petitioner for offences punishable under section 457, 380, 511
read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending on the file of
8th Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade Court, Mumbai is
quashed and set aside. Needless to mention that said criminal
case as against the remaining accused shall continue.
(A.M. BADAR, J.) (NARESH H.PATIL, J.)
