Akram Khan Rahemtulla Khan And ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 1030 Bom

                                                               1                                         APL.136.17.odt

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                      CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 136  OF 2017.


     1] Akram Khan Rahemtulla Khan, 
        aged about      years, Occu. Private,

     2] Amjad Khan Rahemtulla Khan, 
        aged about      years, Occu. Private,

     3] Imran Khan Rahemtulla Khan, 
        aged about      years, Occu. Private,

     4] Mohd. Atib @ Sonu Mohd. Khalid, 
        aged about      years, Occu. Private,

     5] Sheikh Salim Sheikh Sultan,
        aged about      years, Occu. Private,

     5] Sheikh Israel Sheikh Sultan,
        aged about      years, Occu. Private,

          All R/o Gadhi Ward, Pusad, Tah. Pusad,
          Distt. Yavatmal.            ......                            APPLICANTS.

                      ....Versus....

         The State of Maharashtra, through
         Police Station Pusad City, 
         Dist. Yavatmal.               .....                                                 RESPONDENT.


     Mr. M.N. Ali, Advocate for applicants,
     Mr. T.A. Mirza, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent. 


                               CORAM :  B.R. GAVAI & KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.

DATED : MARCH 24, 2017.

     ORAL JUDGMENT (PER B.R. GAVAI, J.)




                                                                2                                         APL.136.17.odt

     1]               Rule.  Rule made returnable forthwith.  Heard the learned

Counsel for the parties finally by consent.

2] The learned Counsel for the applicants states that the

affidavit of the applicant no.5 would be filed during the course of the

day.

3] The applicants, who are the accused, the first informant

and the injured, by way of the present application have jointly applied

to this Court for quashing and setting aside the First Information

Report registered vide Crime No. 420/16 for the offences punishable

under Sections 294, 324, 307 of the Indian Penal Code read with

Sections 4 & 25 of the Arms Act.

4] The First Information Report is lodged by the applicant

no.1 alleging therein that when he was sleeping in his house, there

was a quarrel with the accused and the accused assaulted with a

pipe in his hand and also assaulted his brother - applicant no.6.

5] The applicants, i.e. the accused as well as the first

informant and the injured are the residents of the same locality. The

Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh and others .vs. State of

3 APL.136.17.odt

Punjab and another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 have laid down

various parameters for quashing the criminal proceedings. In the

present case, though the crime is registered for the offence

punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, the nature of

injuries are as follows :-

1) Contused lacerated wound over scalp, occipital region 7 x 8 cm

sharp edges actively bleeding,

2) Abrasion right forearms,

3) Abrasion lower UP over MUCOSA,

type of injury is not grievous,

type of object is sharp and hard.

It could thus be seen that the injuries are not serious. The perusal of

the nature of allegations would also reveal that no element of public

law is involved, inasmuch the incident is an outcome of trivial quarrel

that has taken place inside the house.

6] The trial is yet to commence and as such, the stage of the

proceedings is also such that the powers can be exercised. It is

further to be noted that the accused as well as the first informant and

the injured are residents of the same locality and if the powers are

exercised, it will lead to harmonious co-existence of all of them in the

4 APL.136.17.odt

same locality and permit the harmony in the area. We, therefore, find

that this is a fit case for exercising the powers under Section 482 of

the Criminal Procedure Code for giving an end to the criminal

proceedings.

7] In the result, the Criminal Application is allowed. Rule is

made absolute in terms of prayer clause (1).

                       JUDGE.                                                            J
                                                                                           UDGE.
    J.