Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Nilesh S/O Sharad Gaddewar vs State Of Maharashtra, Through Pso ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 758 Bom

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 758 Bom
Judgement Date : 18 March, 2016

Bombay High Court
Nilesh S/O Sharad Gaddewar vs State Of Maharashtra, Through Pso ... on 18 March, 2016
Bench: B.R. Gavai
                                                                1                                                              apl196.16


                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,




                                                                                                                  
                                    NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                               CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 196 OF 2016




                                                                                    
    Nilesh Sharad Gaddewar,
    aged about 33 years, Occupation
    Doctor at GMC, R/o Plot No.411,




                                                                                   
    Honey Archana Complex, Near
    Raymond Showroom, Ajni, Nagpur.                                                   ... APPLICANT


                                                                 VERSUS




                                                                
    1. State of Maharashtra, 
         through PSO, Sadar, Nagpur.
                                         
                                        
    2. Aparna d/o Harish Vanjari
         (maiden name)
         Smt. Aparna w/o Himanshu Bhimte,
         aged about 29 years, R/o. Plot No.204,
         Pravin Plaza, Nari Ring Road, Power
      

         Greed, Jaripatka, Nagpur - 26.                                             ... RESPONDENTS
   



                                          ....
    Shri Y.B. Mandpe, Advocate for the applicant.
    Ms. R.V. Kaliya, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.
    Shri N.K. Maras, Advocate for respondent No.2.
                                          ....





                                                                 CORAM :  B.R. GAVAI AND
                                                                                      PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ.

DATED : 18TH MARCH, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per B.R. Gavai, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The application is heard

finally with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the

respective parties.

2 apl196.16

2. By way of present application, the applicant approaches this

Court for quashing and setting aside the FIR bearing No. 335/2014 registered

by respondent No.1 for the offence punishable under Sections 279, 337, 427

of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 134, 177 of the Motor Vehicles

Act and subsequent proceedings by way of SCC No. 28283/2014.

3. The FIR in question came to be lodged on the basis of the

complaint of respondent No.2 that when she was travelling from

Dharampeth towards High Court on Moped, one vehicle which was

travelling rashly and in negligent manner from CP Club towards Zero Mile,

gave dash to her Moped thereby causing injury to her and her sister.

4. The applicant as well as respondent No.2 are personally present

in the Court. It is submitted that the dispute has been amicably settled

between the parties and that the respondent No.2 does not wish to proceed

further with the criminal proceedings.

5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot .v.

State of Punjab (reported in 2008(4) SCC, 582) has held that if the parties

have settled the dispute, no useful purpose would be served in continuing

with the proceedings in which no element of public and criminal law is

involved in the nature of the allegations made against the applicant. To give

an end to the criminal proceedings where no element of public and criminal

law is involved in the present matter, this Court can exercise the powers

under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

3 apl196.16

6. In the result, the Criminal Application stands disposed of in view

of the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties. Rule is, therefore,

made absolute in terms of prayer clause (1).

                    JUDGE                                                            JUDGE 
          
    *rrg.            




                                          
                             
                            
      
   







 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter