Shri Hemant Raghunath Mali vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2016 Latest Caselaw 1723 Bom

                                                  {1}
                                                                           crappln503315.odt

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY




                                                                                     
                             BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                      CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5033 OF 2015




                                                             
     Hemant Raghunath Mali,
     age: 36 years, Occ: Business,
     R/o Subhash Nagar, June Dhule,
     Tal. & Dist. Dhule.                                              Applicant




                                                            
              Versus

     1 The State of Maharashtra

     2 Sandhya Gokul Nimkharde,




                                              
        age: 31 years, Occ: Business,
        R/o Jai Hanuman Nagar,
        Jalgaon.              ig                                      Respondents

                                            
     Mr.S.S.Patil, advocate for  the applicant. 
                            
     Mr.S.P.Deshmukh,  APP for Respondent No.1.
     Mr.Sushant V. Dixit, advocate for Respondent No.2.

      
                                                    CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
      

                                                                  K.L.WADANE, JJ.

                                                   DATE    : 21st April, 2016
   



     ORAL JUDGMENT (Per R.M.Borde, J.):
      
     1        Heard.   Rule.   Rule made returnable forthwith and heard 

finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties.

2 This is an application by the accused involved in commission of crime punishable under Sections 354(A), (2), (4), 506 and

509 of the Indian Penal Code in pursuant to registration of First Information, being Crime No.55/2015, registered at Zilla Peth Police Station, Jalgaon.

3 After presentation of the instant petition, notices were directed to be issued to the Respondents. The aggrieved person i.e. Respondent No.2/ original complainant has presented an affidavit stating

{2} crappln503315.odt

therein that since she is getting married and intending to begin a new

life, she does not intend to prosecute the crime registered against the applicant. Original Complainant - Respondent No.2 herein has a just

desire to put an end to the dispute between the parties. The affidavit has been duly sworn by Respondent No.2 - original complainant and is also signed by the learned advocate appearing for her. Same is taken on

record and marked "X" for identification.

4 In view of the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & another, reported in

2012 (10) SCC 303; since the parties have decided to settle the dispute

amongst themselves and that the prosecution is not likely to succeed even if the case is put up for trial and that the allegations levelled against the applicant do not come within the exceptions specified in the aforesaid

judgment, it is desirable to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the applicant in pursuance to Crime No.55/2015.

5 In the result, Criminal Application is allowed. Criminal

Proceedings initiated against the applicant in pursuance to lodging of CR. No.55/2015, registered at Zilla Peth Police Station, Jalgaon, for offences punishable under Sections 354(A), (2), (4), 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code, stands quashed.

     6                Rule is accordingly made absolute.
                                      





               K.L.WADANE                                    R.M.BORDE
                    JUDGE                                        JUDGE
     adb/crappln503315