Satish S/O Soma Wade And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 6460 Bom

                                    1                                 APPLN3850.2017.odt


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

                CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3850 OF 2017



1.     Satish S/o Soma Wade,
       Age : 30 years, Occu. Agri & Business,


2.     Jitendra S/o Soma Wade,
       Age : 25 years, Occu. Business,
       Both R/o. Taramati Nagar,
       Chopda, Tq. Chopda, District Jalgaon.


3.     Vishal S/o Arjun Sandanshiv,
       Age : 29 years, Occu. Student,
       R/o. Bhai Kotwal Road,
       Chopda, Tq. Chopda, District Jalgaon.                  ... Applicants


       VERSUS


1.     The State of Maharashtra.


2.     Dhanraj S/o Vasant Badge,
       Age ; 36 years, Occu. Service,
       R/o. Cahardi, Tq. Chopda,
       District Jalgaon.                                      ... Respondents
                                  ..........
              Mr Sunil B. Jadhav, Advocate for the applicants
               Mr K. N. Lokhande, APP for respondent/State
             Mr B. G. Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent No. 2
                                 .............




 ::: Uploaded on - 24/08/2017                   ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 01:08:28 :::
                                      2                                 APPLN3850.2017.odt




                                  CORAM  :      S. S. SHINDE   &
                                                A. M. DHAVALE, JJ.

                                  DATE      :     22.08.2017.


ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S. S. Shinde, J.) : 



1.              Rule.  Rule made returnable forthwith.  Heard finally with 

the consent of the parties and taken up for final disposal at admission 

stage.  



2.              Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, the applicants 

and respondent No. 2 have filed compromise terms and in support of 

those   terms,   affidavit   is   sworn   in.   The   applicants   and 

informant/respondent No. 2 are present before the Court.  The parties 

are identified by their respective counsel.  



3.              On interaction with respondent No. 2, he submitted that 

the compromise arrived at between the parties is their voluntary act 

and without any coercion and he has no objection to quash the FIR 

registered against the applicants.   Since the compromise terms are on 

record, same needs no reiteration.  




 ::: Uploaded on - 24/08/2017                    ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 01:08:28 :::
                                           3                                  APPLN3850.2017.odt


4.              In   the   light   of   the   compromise   arrived   at   between   the 

parties and on interaction with respondent No. 2, he has stated that he 

has decided not to proceed with the allegations in the FIR.  No fruitful 

purpose would be served by further investigation of the FIR bearing 

No.68/2017 registered  with Chopda  City Police   Station, Jalgaon,  for 

the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120B, 468, 467, 406, 200, 

504   r/w   34   of   the   IPC,   and   continuation   of   proceedings   arising 

therefrom.   Therefore, keeping in mind the exposition of law by the 

Hon'ble   Apex   Court   in   the   matter   of  Gian   Singh   Versus   State   of  

Punjab and Another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 in order to secure 

the ends of justice and to prevent the abuse of process of the Court, we 

are   inclined   to   accept   the   compromise   terms.     Hence,   the   following 

order. 

                                       ORDER

[I] Criminal Application stands allowed in terms of prayer clause 'A'.

5. Rule made absolute in above terms. No costs.

       [ A. M. DHAVALE ]                                    [ S. S. SHINDE ] 
                  JUDGE                                             JUDGE


sgp