Bombay High Court
Padmakar Ramdas Agresar vs The State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 29 March, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
criwp1345.15.doc
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1345 OF 2015
Padmakar Ramdas Agresar
age 54 years, occ. business
r/o Madhuban Apartment
LIC Colony, Jalgaon
Dist. Jalgaon .. PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Dharangaon Police Station,
Dharangaon, Tq. Dharangaon,
Dist. Jalgaon
2. Lakhichand Bhagwan Pachpol
age 42 years, occ. agriculture
r/o Dhar, Tq. Dhrangaon
Dist. Jalgaon .. RESPONDENTS
Mr. N.B. Suryawanshi, advocate for petitioner.
Mr. K.S. Patil, APP for the State.
Mr. G.A. Nagori, advocate for respondent no. 2.
=====
CORAM : R.M. BORDE &
K. L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE : 29th MARCH, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER R. M. BORDE, J. )
1. Heard.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the
parties, petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.
3. Petitioner-accused is involved in Sessions Case no. 123/2015 pending
in the Court of Ad-hoc Sessions Judge - 2 and Assistant Sessions Judge,
criwp1345.15.doc
Jalgaon, in respect of commission of offences punishable under section 306
and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner who is Chairman of the Pat-
Sanstha is alleged to have advanced loan to the tune of Rs. 80,00,000/- to
the family of deceased. Petitioner is alleged to have presented First
Information Report on 09.08.2015 alleging commission of offences
punishable under section 323, 120-B, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code
against deceased Sagar and some of his family members. It is alleged that
on the aforesaid date, deceased Sagar and his family members launched
assault on petitioner on account of persistent persuasion for recovery of
amount due and payable by the family of deceased. It is further alleged that
deceased Sagar committed suicide on 16.02.2015 and, in the suicide note
attributed onus on the accused. First Information Report came to be lodged
by the uncle of deceased implicating petitioner as abattor who is stated to
have aided and abetted commission of suicide by deceased Sagar.
Petitioner contends that after due investigation, charge sheet came to be
presented and, since the office is triable by the Court of Sessions, the case
is committed to the Sessions Court. On 25-08-2015, papers were received
by the Sessions Judge, Jalgaon alongwith record and proceeding of RCC No.
82/2015. Learned Sessions Judge handed over the case for trial to the
Assistant Sessions Judge, Jalgaon vide order dated 04.09.2015 and,
prescribed 21.09.2015 as the date of appearance. Learned Assistant
Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, on the very first day prescribed in the sessions
case, directed framing of charge against accused. Petitioner contends that
he did not have any opportunity to tender application seeking discharge and
that he has not been heard in the matter before framing of charge by the
criwp1345.15.doc
Assistant Sessions Judge. It is not evident from record that before framing
of charge, accused has been given an opportunity of hearing by the
Assistant Sessions Judge, Jalgaon.
4. In the instant petition, petitioner contends that even if the allegations
levelled in the First Information Report together with the material placed on
record alongwith charge-sheet is taken to be true, the ingredients of section
107 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be said to have been satisfied and as
such, petitioner cannot be hold responsible for commission of offence
punishable under section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. In this context, we
refrain to record our opinion, since we deem it appropriate to refer the
matter back to the Assistant Sessions Judge. Without recording any finding
as regards the contentions raised by learned counsel for petitioner, we direct
quashment of the charge framed by the Assistant Sessions Judge on
21.09.2015 and, remit the matter back to the same Court for re-
consideration. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, before
framing of charge shall observe the procedure prescribed under section 227
and 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and proceed to frame charge. It
would be open for the petitioner to tender application for discharge under
section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the date of appearance
prescribed in the matter and, it would be appropriate for learned Assistant
Sessions Judge to consider such application, if presented in accordance
with the provisions of law. Accused shall appear before the Assistant
Sessions Judge, Jalgaon, on 11.04.2016 and may tender application for
discharge within contemplation of section 227 of the Code of Criminal
criwp1345.15.doc
Procedure on the given date. Keeping the option to tender application for
discharge under section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure open for the
petitioner, writ petition stands allowed to the extent as specified above. Rule
made absolute accordingly.
( K. L. WADANE ) ( R. M. BORDE )
JUDGE JUDGE
dyb
