Nanda Prakash Pawar And Others vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 8316 Bom

                                                  1                                                              apl799.16


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

                    CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 799 OF 2016

1. Nanda Prakash Pawar,
     aged about 40 years, 
     Occupation Labourer;

2. Shakilabano Shaikh Salim,
     aged about 46 years, 
     Occupation Labourer;

3. Mayabai Narhari Chichghate,
     aged about 52 years, 
     Occupation Labourer.

     R/o Near Police Prashikshan Kendra,
     Gadanki Road, Old City, Akola.                                     ... APPLICANTS

                                                   VERSUS

1. State of Maharashtra through
     Police Station Officer, Dabki Road,
     Akola, Tq and Distt Akola.

2. Smt. Nandabai Bhagwan Mhaske,
     aged about 42 years, Occupation
     Service, At RPTS, R/o PTC Quarters,
     Akola, Tq and Distt Akola.                                         ... RESPONDENTS

                                      ....
Shri J.B. Gandhi, Advocate for the applicants.
Shri S.A. Ashirgade, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1.
Respondent No.2 is served.
                                      ....

                                                                     CORAM :  PRASANNA B. VARALE AND
                                                                                          ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ.

DATED : 01ST NOVEMBER, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Prasanna B. Varale, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the

consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

2 apl799.16

2. The applicants are before this Court seeking quashment of the

First Information Report registered vide Crime No. 126/2016 by Dabki Road

Police Station, Akola on 14.07.2016 for the offence punishable under Sections

306, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and quashing the

Charge Sheet No.105/2006 filed in connection with Crime No. 126/2016 in

the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Akola.

3. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants

and learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of respondent No.2.

4. Shri Gandhi, the learned Counsel for the applicants invites our

attention to the FIR dated 14.07.2016 and submits that the report is

subsequent to a Marg registered bearing No. 15/2016 on 24.05.2016. He

further submits that one Smt. Nandabai Mhaske who was working as Safai

Kamgar at Police Training Center, Akola stated that she was appointed from

the category of compassionate ground appointment in place of her deceased

husband. The learned Counsel also submits that she was on medical leave

for two months and joined her duties on 24.05.2016 along with her daughter

Ashwini aged 20 years. At about 05:00 p.m., after filling up some water, when

she reported on duty, she found that a mob was gathered near the gate. On

enquiry, it was informed to her that her daughter Ashwini met with an

accident. It is further stated that Ashwini was suffering from epilepsy attack

since her age of nine years and since last five to six years, she was also

suffering from mental ailment. It is stated that her daughter was under

3 apl799.16

treatment in the Government Hospital at Nagpur and she was fed-up with

health condition and might have committed suicide. It is stated in the Marg

report that she was not carrying any suspicion against any body.

5. Shri Gandhi, the learned Counsel for the applicants submits that

after a period of two months, a report came to be lodged against the present

applicants. In the report, it is alleged that these applicants picked up quarrel

with the daughter of informant/complainant. They abused the daughter of

complainant and they alleged that the daughter of the complainant was of

loose character and they were instigating the daughter of the complainant to

commit suicide. It is further stated in the report that the complainant

intervened in the quarrel. Some other employees namely Deepali Wakode,

Bhaskar Chauhan, Ravi Damodar Sur, Gopal Chauhan were present at that

time. The informant then pacified her daughter and proceeded for her work.

At about 05:00 p.m., she was informed by Gopal Chauhan that Ashwini

committed suicide by falling on the railway track. Shri Gandhi submits that

Crime No. 126/2016 came to be registered against these applicants for

commission of offence under Sections 306, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of

the Indian Penal Code. He then submits that the charge sheet came to be

filed by the investigating agency.

6. Shri Gandhi, the learned Counsel then by inviting our attention

to the statements of witnesses recorded by the investigating, submits that

these statements clearly show that the versions of all theses witnesses are

hearsay. He further submits that the applicants approached the office of

4 apl799.16

Principal of Police Training Center and sought for certain information under

Right to Information Act and the information reveals that the complainant

was directed by the superior officers not to come along with her daughter

while attending the official duty. It further reveals that on 24.05.2016, there

was some quarrel between the applicants, the complainant and her daughter

and the Principal cautioned the applicants and the complainant and asked

them to proceed to their duties in stead of quarreling in the premises.

Learned Counsel then submits that the copy of the station diary placed on

record reveals that there was some quarrel between the complainant, the

applicants and the daughter of the complainant. The daughter of the

complainant was shouting and making hue and cry and the senior officers

intervened and asked the workers to attend their duties in stead of making

noise and disturbing the work.

7. Shri Gandhi, learned Counsel submits that the material placed on

record clearly shows that the daughter of the complainant was mentally

unstable and was also suffering from epilepsy. He also submits that the

change of version of the complainant herself clearly shows that the

complainant though initially submitted that her daughter committed suicide

as she was suffering from illness, subsequently after period of two months,

changed her stance and with an oblique motive and lodged the FIR against

these applicants and falsely implicated these applicants. Thus, it is the

submission of learned Counsel that the report lodged with an ulterior motive

only to harass the applicants is an abuse of process of law and the report as

well as the charge sheet be quashed and set aside.

5 apl799.16

8. Shri Ashirgade, the learned Addl PP vehemently opposes the

application and submits that in the process of investigation, the statements

of the witnesses are recorded and they support the contention in the report

submitted by the complainant. Thus, it is the submission of learned APP that

as there is sufficient material against these applicants, the application be

dismissed.

9. On the backdrop of the rival submissions of the learned Counsel

appearing on behalf of the respective parties, we have gone through the

material placed on record. It is not in dispute that initially when the Marg

was registered, the mother of the deceased in clear and unambiguous words

stated that her daughter was suffering from ailments and she was fed-up with

these ailments and she might have committed suicide. The Marg registering

the accidental death on 24.05.2016 at about 10:23 p.m., is an immediate

disclosure. At that point of time, the complainant, mother of deceased stated

nothing about any quarrel took place with her and her daughter and the

applicants. Learned APP made an attempt to submit that there is an

explanation offered in the report and the complainant stated that as she was

mentally disturbed due to the death of her daughter, she left Akola and was

residing with her brother and after returning from her brother's place, she

lodged the report.

10. Shri Gandhi, the learned Counsel for the applicants had invited

our attention to a contra material sought for under the Right to Information

6 apl799.16

Act and the same is placed on record at Annexure-C. It is informed to the

applicants that complainant Nandabai Mhaske was on duty at Akola from

24.05.2016 to 14.07.2016. Along with the said communication, copy of

muster roll is also placed on record. The same was provided in response to

query of the applicants. Thus, there is considerable merit in the submission

of learned Counsel for the applicants that the explanation offered by the

complainant that she was out of station and the report was lodged after she

returned from her brother's place, is falsified and the material clearly shows

that the complainant was attending the duty from 24.05.2016 to 14.07.2016.

Insofar as the statements recorded by the investigating agency are

concerned, perusal of these statements of the witnesses who are named in

the FIR namely Ravindra Damodar and Gopal Chauhan show that the

version of these witnesses is hearsay. Statement of one witness Sunil Mhaske

is also recorded which shows that he is the brother of deceased Ashwini and

his version is also hearsay version. Gopal Chauhan also states that it was an

information received by him. Thus, there is considerable merit in the

submission of Shri Gandhi, the learned Counsel for the applicants that these

persons are named as witnesses to the incident, none of these persons is an

eye witness to the incident. There is also merit in his submission that the

material collected by the investigating agency is falling too short to connect

the applicants with the commission of crime. On the contrary, with such

material, the prosecution can hardly establish any case against these

applicants and the initiation of criminal proceedings or continuation of

criminal proceedings against these applicants would be nothing but an

abuse of process of law and the only result even if the applicants face the trial

7 apl799.16

is of acquittal of these applicants.

11. Considering all these aspects, in our opinion, the learned Counsel

for the applicants has made out a case. The application is allowed in terms of

prayer clause (A) and (A-1).

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to

costs.

                JUDGE                                                            JUDGE 
      
*rrg.