Subhash S/O Magan Shewale And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2016 Latest Caselaw 7053 Bom

                                           (1)                               cria6660.16




                                                                              
                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                      
                         CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.6660 OF 2016

    1.     Subhash Magan Shewale                               ..Applicants
           Age. 36 years, Occ. Business




                                                     
    2.     Nandu s/o. Kisan Shelke
           Age. 30 years, Occ. Pvt. Service

           Both R/o. Maniknagar, Naregaon,




                                           
           Aurangabad, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.



    1.     The State of Maharashtra
                                    ig   Versus

                                                               ..Non-applicants
           (Through Police Station MIDC
                                  
           Cidco, Aurangabad)

    2.     Anis s/o. Shabbir Pathan
           Age. 21 years, Occ. Education,
          

           R/o. Maniknagar, Naregaon,
           Aurangabad, Tq. & Dist.
           Aurangabad.
       



    Mr.P.C. Mayure, Advocate for the applicants.
    Mr.K.S. Patil, A.P.P. for the non-applicant No.1/State.
    Mr.R.R. Imale, Advocate for the non-applicant No.2.





                                           CORAM :    Z.A. HAQ,J.

                                           DATED :    07.12.2016
    ORAL JUDGMENT :-

    .               Heard.

02. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

03. The applicants have assailed the order passed by the learned Magistrate refusing to dispose the prosecution

(2) cria6660.16

for the offence punishable under section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, as settled between the parties.

04. The learned Advocates for the applicants and non- applicant No.2 relying on the judgment given by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Yogendra Yadav Vs. The State of Jharkhand, (2014) 9 SCC 653, have submitted that the impugned order be set aside and the prosecution against the applicant

be disposed, as the matter is settled between the parties.

05.

Considering the proposition laid down in the judgment referred above, the following order is passed:-

(i) The impugned order is set aside.

(ii) The prosecution of the applicant vide R.C.C. No.1201 of 2015 is quashed.

(iii)Rule made absolute in above terms. In the circumstances, parties to bear their own costs.

[Z.A. HAQ,J.]

snk/2016/DEC16/cria6660.16