Bombay High Court
Dulare S/O Harinarayan Pandey vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 27 July, 2016
Bench: B.R. Gavai
apl496.16 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.496 OF 2016.
APPLICANT: Dulare s/o Harinarayan Pandey,
aged about 60 years, Occu: Retired,
Resident of New Majri Colony, Post
ig Shivaji Nagar, Distt.Chandrapur.
: VERSUS :
NON-APPLICANTS: 1. The State of Maharashtra,
through the Police Inspector,
Police Station Warora, Distt.Chandrapur.
2. Shri Mahaveer Shikshan Prasarak Samiti,
Wani, through its President Shri Jitendra
Mulchand Jain, resident of Wani, Distt.
Yavatmal.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mr.A.A.Naik, Advocate with Mr.H.A.Deshpande, Advocate for the
applicant.
Mr.C.A.Lokhande, APP for respondent no.1.
Mr.B.G.Kulkarni, Advocate for non-applicant no.2.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
CORAM: B.R.GAVAI AND
V.M.DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATED: 27th JULY, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R.Gavai, J.)
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by
consent of learned counsel for both the parties.
2. By way of present application, the applicant seeks
quashing of First Information Report being Crime No.31 of 1994
registered against the applicant for the offence punishable under
Sections 409 and 477-A of the Indian Penal Code and consequent
Regular Criminal Case No.288 of 1994 pending on the file of the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandrapur.
3. The applicant was working as an Assistant Teacher and
thereafter he was promoted as a Headmaster. It appears that
there was dispute between the applicant and the Management, as
a result of it, he came to be reverted to the post of Assistant
Teacher.
4. The litigation with regard to reversion has reached up to
the Hon'ble Apex Court. However, it further appears that on
account of the certain allegations against the applicant while
functioning as Headmaster, the aforesaid FIR came to be lodged
for the offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal
Code.
5. Be that as it may, now the matter has been amicably
settled between the parties. A compromise petition is filed in the
LPA and the LPA is also disposed of in terms of the compromise
being arrived at between the parties.
6. The applicant as well as the President of the respondent
no.2 - Management are personally present before the Court and
they reiterated about the settlement.
7. In that view of the matter, we do not find that any
purpose would be served keeping the said criminal proceedings
pending as substantiative matter is amicably settled between the
parties.
8. In that view of the matter, rule is made absolute in
terms of prayer Clauses 'A' and 'D' of the application.
JUDGE JUDGE
chute
-CERTIFICATE-
I certify that this Order uploaded is a true and
correct copy of original signed order.
Uploaded by : P.Z.Chute,
Pvt.Secretary.
Uploaded on: 29/07/2016.
