Bombay High Court
Shriram S/O. Namdeo Nimkarde And ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ... on 23 August, 2017
Bench: V.A. Naik
1 jg.apl.564.17.odt
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 564 OF 2017
(1) Shriram s/o Namdeo Nimkarde,
Aged about 42 years,
Occ. Agriculturist, R/o. Wakana,
Tah. Sangrampur, Distt. Buldhana.
(2) Mahesh s/o Gajanan Date,
Aged about 23 years,
Occ. Agricultural Labour,
R/o. Wakana, Tah. Sangrampur,
Distt. Buldhana.
(3) Rajendra @ Raju S/o Ramesh Bombatkar,
Age Major, Occ. Agriculturist,
R/o. Wadoda, Tah. Muktainagar,
District - Jalgaon (Khandesh).
(4) Sau. Sarla w/o Shriram Nimkarde,
Aged about 30 years,
Occ. Agriculturist, R/o. Wakana,
Tah. Sangrampur, Distt. Buldhana.
(5) Vishnu s/o Gajanan Date,
Aged Major, Occ. Agricultural Labour,
R/o. Wakana, Tah. Sangrampur,
Distt. Buldhana. ... Applicants
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Tamgaon (Sangrampur),
Tah. Sangrampur, District - Buldhana. ... Respondent
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri R. D. Karode, Advocate for the applicants
Shri K. R. Lule, APP for the State/respondent
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
::: Uploaded on - 31/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 01/09/2017 00:34:08 :::
2 jg.apl.564.17.odt
CORAM : SMT VASANTI A NAIK AND
M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATE : 23/08/2017.
Judgment (Per : M.G. Giratkar, J)
Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel
appearing for the parties.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
The applicants lodged counter reports against each other.
All applicants prayed by the present application to quash and set aside
the FIR lodged against each other by Police Station,
Tamgaon(Sangrampur), Tahsil Sangrampur, District Buldhana.
Applicants are seeking quashment of FIR No. 94/2017 registered with
Police Station, Tamgaon(Sangrampur) on the report of applicant no. 2
Mahesh Date and FIR No. 97/2017 registered by the same Police
Station on the report of Sarla Nimkarde, applicant no. 4.
The applicants are relatives of each other. Dispute took
place at the time of partition of the agriculture field at Mouza Bhilkhed,
because of hot exchange of words. Mahesh Date (applicant no. 2) who
is nephew of sister of Shriram Nimkarde lodged FIR on 18-6-2017
3 jg.apl.564.17.odt
against his maternal uncle Shriram Nimkarde for the offences
punishable under Sections 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is submitted that wife of Shriram Nimkarde has also
lodged report against applicant Vishnu Gajanan Date and Mahesh
Gajanan Date who are nephew of Shriram Nimkarde. On the report of
Sarla Nimkarde, Crime No. 97/2017 came to be registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504 of the Indian Penal
Code. It is submitted that all the applicants are relatives of each other.
It is submitted that they have settled their dispute and now they do not
want to prosecute each other, therefore prayed to quash and set aside
the FIR registered against each other.
The applicant Mahesh Gajanan Date who is the
complainant in Crime No. 94/2017 is present in Court along with other
applicants/accused against whom crime is registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
The applicant Sarla Nimkarde is present along with other
applicants/accused against whom Crime No. 97/2017 came to be
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 323 and 504
of the Indian Penal Code.
4 jg.apl.564.17.odt
Complainants Mahesh Date and Sarla Nimkarde have stated
before us that they do not want to prosecute each other. They are
relatives of each other, therefore, prayed to quash and set aside FIR
registered against each other.
Shri Karode, learned counsel for the applicants has pointed
out decision in the case of Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of
Punjab and another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466.
Shri Lule, learned Additional Public Prosecutor supported
the action taken by the respondent.
There is no dispute that the applicants are close relatives of
each other. As per the contentions of the applicants, there was partition
of ancestral agriculture field. At the time of partition, due to
misunderstanding, there was quarrel. The applicant no. 2 and the
applicant no. 4 lodged reports against each other (party).
Though the offence punishable under Section 307 of the
Indian Penal Code is serious and grave in nature, in the case of
Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another (cited
supra), Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that when the injured/
5 jg.apl.564.17.odt
complainant itself not ready to prosecute the accused, then there will be
no chance of any conviction, and, therefore, it will not be proper to keep
the case pending only because offence punishable under Section 307 of
the Indian Penal Code is not compoundable.
As per the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another (cited
supra), FIR for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code
can be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Looking to the submissions of all the applicants, it is clear that they have
lodged the reports against each other due to misunderstanding. They
are close relatives. They have submitted that they have buried all their
misunderstandings and now they are having good relations. Looking to
the submissions of the applicants, the report lodged by the applicant
nos. 2 and 4 against each other (applicants) are liable to be quashed
and set aside.
Hence, we allow the application in terms of prayer clause
(a) and hereby quash and set aside two First Information Reports viz.
(1) FIR No. 94/2017 registered for the offences punishable under
Section 307, 506 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and
6 jg.apl.564.17.odt
(2) FIR No. 97/2017 registered for the offences punishable under
Section 324, 323 and 504 of Indian Penal Code lodged at Tamgaon
(Sangrampur), Tah. Sangrampur, District Buldhana.
JUDGE JUDGE
wasnik
