Chandanmal Dagdulal Pagariya And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2016 Latest Caselaw 3680 Bom

                                                  Criminal Appln. No.1919/2008
                                            1




                                                                          
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                  
                      CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1919 OF 2008




                                                 
     1.       Chandanmal s/o Dagdulal Pagariya
              Age 75 years, Occ. Business,




                                         
              R/o Kasari Bazar, Aurangabad
              At present residing at Pagariya Colony,
                             
              Railway Station, Aurangabad

     2.       Dharamchand s/o Harlal Dagda (Jain),
                            
              Age 69 years, Occ. Bond Writer,
              R/o Nawabpura, Aurangabad

     3.       Kantilal s/o Chunilal Suryawanshi,
              Age 70 years, Occ. Business,
      


              R/o Kelibazar, Aurangabad          ...       APPLICANTS
   



                      VERSUS

     1.       The State of Maharashtra
              Through : City Police Chowk,





              Aurangabad
              (Copy to be served on P.P.
              of the High Court of Bombay,
              Bench at Aurangabad)

     2.       Nandkishor s/o Laxminarayan Kagliwal





              Age about 62 years, Occ. Business,
              R/o Near Mahanubhav Ashram,
              Paithan Gate, Aurangabad          ...        RESPONDENTS

                                     .....
     Shri T. Vinod, Advocate for applicant
     Shri R.B. Bagul, A.P.P. for respondent No.1/ State
     Shri P.K. Lakhotiya, Advocate for respondent No.2
                                     .....




    ::: Uploaded on - 19/07/2016                  ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 08:39:15 :::
                                                      Criminal Appln. No.1919/2008
                                            2




                                                                            
                                   CORAM:       A.V. NIRGUDE AND
                                                A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ.

DATED: 8th July, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : A.V. Nirgude, J.):

1. The applicants are accused in Crime No.1/2008.

Respondent No.1 - complainant alleged that, the applicants

forged document and filed it in Civil Court. There was proceeding

pending between the parties and in such proceedings, the

disputed document was filed. The respondent No.2 alleged that,

before filing the document in the Court, the applicants forged it.

The Civil Court, however, did not deal with such allegations and

dismissed respondent No.2's suit.

2. Learned Civil Judge, while appreciating the case

between the parties, did not observe that there was forgery in

the document. On the other hand, before the learned Civil Judge

could deliver his judgment, the present complaint was filed. The

application was admitted in order to examine as to whether the

complaint is barred for want of the Civil Court's action. Assuming

that there was no bar in making his complaint, we are of the

view that this complaint deserves to be quashed on the basis of

Criminal Appln. No.1919/2008

the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of

Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal & ors. (1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335.

The case squarely falls in Category No.7.

3. Criminal Application, therefore, is allowed in terms of

prayer clause (B).

              (A.I.S. CHEEMA, J.)                (A.V. NIRGUDE, J.)
      
   



     fmp/cri1919.08