Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 2087 Bom
Judgement Date : 28 April, 2017
1 Cri.A-1526-17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1526 OF 2017
1. Punamchand Ramnarayan Rathi,
Age: 71 years, Occu. Business,
R/o 15, Noormal Lohiya Lane,
Kolkata (West Bengal)
2. Bhawarsinh Mulsinh Rathod,
Age: 50 years, Occu. Business,
R/o : 15, Noormal Lohiya Lane,
Kolkata (West Bengal)
3. Nandkishore s/o Nanuram Jhanwar,
Age: 60 years, occu. Business,
R/o : 15, Noormal Lohiya Lane,
Kolkata, ( West Bengal) ...APPLICANTS
[Ori. Accused]
versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Kranti Chowk Police Station,
Aurangabad, District- Aurangabad.
2. Deelip S/o Nanakaram Paraswani,
Age: 45 yrs. Occ.: Business, ,
R/o: Suraksh Sarees,
Paithan Gate, Aurangabad
Distr. Aurangabad. ...RESPONDENTS
[No. 2 Ori. Complainant ]
.....
Mr. Swapnil Rathi, Advocate for applicants
Mr. K.D. Munde, APP for Respondent state
Mr. S.J. Jain, Advocate for respondent No. 2
...
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND
K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.
DATED : 28th APRIL, 2017.
2 Cri.A-1526-17
ORAL JUDGMENT :- [ Per: S.S. SHINDE, J.]
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally, with
consent of the parties.
2. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 -
original complainant invites our attention to the paragraph No. 5
of the affidavit in-reply filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 and
submits that applicants No. 1 to 3 and respondent No. 2 have
decided to amicably settle all the matters pending before the
Courts and Tribunal at Kolkata and at Aurangabad out of the
Court. They have decided to support to each other for disposing
of all the matters. Therefore, he has no objection for quashing
the first information report bearing crime No. 0098 of 2017
registered with Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad for the
offences punishable under sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471,
474, 120-B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Today, respondent No. 2 is present in the Court hall. He is
identified by the learned counsel appearing on his behalf. On
interaction with him, he stated that he has filed affidavit in-reply
and averments in the said affidavit in-reply is his voluntary act.
The parties have entered into compromise amicably and without
any coercion. He has no objection to quash and set aside the
impugned FIR.
3 Cri.A-1526-17
4. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2, on
instructions, undertakes that respondent No. 2 is ready to deposit
Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) towards costs in the Registry
of this Court on or before 4th May, 2017.
5. Upon careful perusal of the averments in the petition,
affidavit in-reply filed by respondent No. 2 - original complainant
and also considering the submissions of both sides and keeping
in view the exposition of law in the case of Gian Singh Vs State
of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303,
continuation of further proceedings would be abuse of process of
law. In that view of the matter, we deem it appropriate to allow
the application. Accordingly, we allow the application in terms of
prayer clause "C". Hence, we pass the following order:
(i) The application is allowed in terms of prayer
clause "C" subject to deposit of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) by respondent No. 2 on or before 4 th
May, 2017 in the Registry.
(ii) After depositing the amount of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand), the same shall be given to
the Government Child Care / Shelter Home,
Government of Maharashtra, Paithan, Tahsil Paithan,
District Aurangabad to utilize the same for welfare of
4 Cri.A-1526-17
inmates of the Shelter Home.
(iii) This order will take effect after depositing the
amount of costs.
6. The application is allowed in above terms. Rule is made
absolute accordingly.
Sd/- Sd/-
[ K. K. SONAWANE, J. ] [ S.S. SHINDE, J.]
MTK
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!