Nural Haq @ Mohammed Salim Abdul ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 619 Bom

 APL 910.16 + APL 130.17.odt                  1


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

          CRIMINAL APPLICATION [APL] NO.910 OF 2016


 1]     Nurul Haq @ Mohammed Salim
        Abdul Haq, Age 44 years,
        Occupation-Business,
        R/o. Shanty Nagar, Behind Garden,
        Lal Nagar, Nagpur.

 2]     Mr. Rahul s/o Kantilal Soni,
        Age 30 years, Occupation-Business,
        R/o. Opposite Dr. Wadia's Hospital,
        Hansapuri, Old Bhandara Road,
        Nagpur.                           ..                      APPLICANTS

                               .. VERSUS ..

 State of Maharashtra,
 Through Police Station Officer,
 Police Station Tahsil,
 Nagpur.                                           ..       NON-APPLICANT


 WITH

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION [APL] NO.130 OF 2017

 1]     Damodhar s/o Pandurang Lilhare,
        Age 44 years, Occupation-Advocate,
        R/o. 681, Hiwari Nagar Layout,
        Near Power House P 9,
        Nagpur.

 2]     Nurul Haq @ Mohammad Salim Abdul Haq,
        Age 44 years, Occupation-Business,
        R/o. Shanty Nagar, Behind Garden,
        Lal Nagar, Nagpur.              ..    APPLICANTS

                               .. VERSUS ..



::: Uploaded on - 14/03/2017                      ::: Downloaded on - 15/03/2017 00:23:40 :::
  APL 910.16 + APL 130.17.odt                 2

 State of Maharashtra,
 Through P.S.O. Tahsil,
 Nagpur.                                             ..       NON-APPLICANT


                     ..........
 Shri R.R. Vyas, Advocate for Applicants in APL 910/2016,
 Shri O.K. Masurke, Advocate for Applicants in APL 130/2017,
 Shri S.M. Ukey, A.P.P. for Non-Applicant-State.
                     ..........


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

DATED : MARCH 08, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : B.R. GAVAI, J.)

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard

by consent.

2] In Criminal Application (APL) No.910/2016,

applicants, who are original first informants and accused in

First Information Report No.73/2013, have prayed for

quashing and setting aside the said First Information Report

as well as the consequential criminal proceedings, whereas

in Criminal Application (APL) No.130/2017 is filed by the first

informants in the said crime and the accused no.2.

3] The parties are personally present in the court and

they reiterate about the settlement.

4] The perusal of First Information Report as well as

charge-sheet would reveal that the dispute is with regard to

sell of dwelling house. The perusal of First Information

Report would reveal that the dispute between the parties is

purely personal and no element of public law is involved.

5] When the parties have amicably settled their civil

dispute, we find that no purpose would be served in

continuing the criminal proceedings between the parties.

Parties, in order to live peaceful life, have decided to give an

end to the criminal proceedings.

6] In that view of the matter, both Criminal

Applications are allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of

prayer clause (2) in Criminal Application (APL) No.910/2016

and in terms of prayer clause (B) in Criminal Application

(APL) No.130/2017.

(Kum. Indira Jain, J.) (B.R. Gavai, J.)

.........

Gulande, PA