Bombay High Court
Bhavesh Vinod Shah And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 16 August, 2017
Bench: R.M. Savant
Rane * 1/5 * WP-1634-2017 (SR.37)
Wednesday, 16.8.2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1634 OF 2017
Bhavesh Vinod Shah and Ors. ....Petitioners
V/s.
State of Maharashtra and anr. ....Respondents
*****
Mr. J.B. Mishra, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mrs. S.D. Shinde, APP for State, respondent no.1.
Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate for respondent no.2.
CORAM :- R.M. SAVANT &
SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.
DATE :- 16TH AUGUST, 2017.
P.C. :-
1. The writ jurisdiction of this Court is invoked to
quash the Criminal Case No. 3536/PS/2016 arising out of
FIR No.230 of 2016 registered with the Goregaon Police
Station. Insofar as the criminal case is concerned, the
Rane * 2/5 * WP-1634-2017 (SR.37)
Wednesday, 16.8.2017
same is pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 67 th
Court, Borivali, Mumbai. The FIR came to be lodged by
respondent no.2 herein on account of the death of his
brother which was caused on account of the fact that he
came into contact with a live wire whilst he was crossing
the road. The petitioners are the accused and are the
Contractors who have been appointed by the Municipal
Corporation of Greater Mumbai ("MCGM" for short) to
beautify the flower beds installed on the road divider. The
live wire was touching the fencing which was put up on
the flower bed. The parties have settled the matter, as a
result of which, the first informant i.e. respondent no.2,
Suryakant Narayan Chavan, who is the brother of the
deceased, has filed his affidavit dated 11 th April, 2017
wherein he has stated that the deceased was not married
and was residing with his father and two brothers. It is
further stated in para-2 that, the petitioners have paid
compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- to the father of the
deceased by a Demand Draft and that he has agreed to
Rane * 3/5 * WP-1634-2017 (SR.37)
Wednesday, 16.8.2017
withdraw the complaint of his own will and consent. It is
further stated that, he has no grievance of any nature
against any of the petitioners and that he has no objection
if this Court quashes the Criminal Complaint No.
3536/PS/2016 pending before the Learned Metropolitan
Magistrate, 67th Court, Borivali, Mumbai.
2. Insofar as, the other family members are
concerned i.e. father and the two other brothers of the
deceased i.e. Narayan Vithal Chavan (father),
Chandrakant Narayan Chavan and Vilas Narayan Chavan
(brothers), have also filed their affidavit dated 11 th April,
2017. In para-2 of the said Affidavit, the factum of the
petitioners having paid compensation is accepted by
them. They have also stated that, they out of their free
will and consent, agreed to withdraw the complaint
against the petitioners. They have stated that, they have
no objection if the Court quashes the said Criminal
Complaint No. 3536/PS/2016 pending before the Learned
Rane * 4/5 * WP-1634-2017 (SR.37)
Wednesday, 16.8.2017
Metropolitan Magistrate, 67th Court, Borivali, Mumbai for
the offences punishable under Section 304A Indian Penal
code. The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent no.2, Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, identifies the first
informant, Suryakant Narayan Chavan. He is also
identified by his Aadhar Card bearing No. AICPC8968M.
When put in the box and queried, he states that the
Affidavit which is on record at Exhibit-C is his. He
accepts the fact that, Rs.10,00,000/- has been paid by the
petitioner by a Demand Draft to his father. He further
accepts that, he has no objection if the criminal
proceedings are quashed and set aside. He states that,
his father Narayan Vithal Chavan on account of his old
age, is unable to remain present in Court today.
3. In view of the aforesaid and in the light of the
judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh
V/s. State of Punjab, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303
and Narinder Singh V/s. State of Punjab, reported in
Rane * 5/5 * WP-1634-2017 (SR.37)
Wednesday, 16.8.2017
(2014) 6 SCC 466 , there is no impediment in quashing
the proceedings, though the Learned APP submitted that
since the offence is under Section 304A, the relief sought
by the above petition may not be granted. We are of the
view that the interest of justice would be served if the
proceedings are quashed and set aside as no useful
purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings
pending. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed and
made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
4. Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, undertakes to file his
Vakalatnama during the course of the week.
(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) (R.M. SAVANT, J)
