Sou. Kiran Rakesh Sharma And ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. P.S.O. ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 6800 Bom

                                        1                                      jg.apl 554.17.odt

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

                 Criminal Application (APL) No. 554 of 2017

(1) Sou. Kiran Rakesh Sharma,
      Aged 51 Years, Occu - Service,
      Resident of Bajarang Colony, 
      Railway Dibba Coach, Jabalpur.  

(2) Nilesh s/o Ichchulal Damahe
      Aged   Years, Occu - Private, 
      Resident of Chichala, Tah. Ramtek, 
      District Nagpur. 

(3) Bharat Anandrao Mohare,                                               
      Aged   Years, Occu - Private, 
      Resident of Chichala, Tah. Ramtek, 
      District Nagpur.                                                     .... Applicants

      //  Versus //

(1) State of Maharashtra,
      Through P.S.O. Police Station 
      Ramtek, District Nagpur. 

(2) Sujit Bharat Mohare
      Aged   Years, Occu - 
      Resident of Chichala, Tah. Ramtek, 
      District Nagpur.                                             .... Non-applicants

Ms. Neeta Gautam, Advocate for the applicants 
Ms. T. H. Khan, Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant no. 1
The non-applicant no. 2 in person
                                                         
                                    CORAM      : SMT. VASANTI  A  NAIK AND
                                              M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
                                     DATE  : 05-09-2017.

JUDGMENT (Per : M. G. GIRATKAR, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The criminal

.....2/-

2 jg.apl 554.17.odt

application is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of

the learned counsel for the parties.

2. By the present application, the applicants challenge the First

Information Report (FIR) lodged by the non-applicant no. 2 in the Police

Station, Ramtek, District Nagpur. The applicants prayed to quash and set

aside FIR registered vide Crime No. 399/2017 for the offence punishable

under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is

submitted that the non-applicant no. 2 lodged the report alleging that the

applicants in furtherance of their common intention cheated him by

inducing to pay Rs. 1,65,000/-.

3. The applicants assured the non-applicant no. 2 to provide job

in the Railway. It is further report lodged by the non-applicant no. 2 that

Rs. 1,65,000/- was given by the non-applicant no. 2 to the applicants but

they failed to provide any service to the non-applicant no. 2. The non-

applicant no. 2 came to know that the applicants deceived/cheated him

and then he lodged the report. On his report, crime was registered at

Police Station, Ramtek for the offence punishable under Section 420 read

with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. During the course of submissions, it is submitted that the

.....3/-

3 jg.apl 554.17.odt

applicants and the non-applicant no. 2 have compromised the matter and

the non-applicant no. 2 do not want to prosecute the applicants,

therefore, prayed to quash and set aside the FIR lodged by the non-

applicant no. 2 against the applicants.

5. Today, all the applicants and the non-applicant no. 2 are

present before the Court. The non-applicant no. 2 is identified by the

counsel of the applicants.

6. We asked the non-applicant no. 2, then he replied that he has

settled the matter out of the Court and he do not want to prosecute the

applicants.

7. In view of the further development after lodging the report, it

is clear that the applicants and the non-applicant no. 2 have settled the

dispute out of the Court and as per the say of the non-applicant no. 2, he

does not want to prosecute all the applicants.

8. In view of the settlement, no fruitful purpose will be served

by keeping the matter pending before the Court. There is no possibility

of any conviction of any of the applicants because the non-applicant no. 2

would not depose against the applicants in view of the settlement

between them. In view of the settlement between the parties, this Court

.....4/-

4 jg.apl 554.17.odt

can quash the FIR lodged against the applicants in view of the law laid

down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of

Punjab and another (2012) 10 SCC 303. The applicants and the non-

applicant no. 2 have settled their grievance. In view of their compromise,

FIR lodged by the non-applicant no. 2 against the applicant nos. 1, 2 and

3 for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 34 of

the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station, Ramtek, District

Nagpur vide Crime No. 399/2017 is liable to be quashed and set aside.

Accordingly, we allow the criminal application in terms of prayer clause

(i) and quash and set aside FIR vide Crime No. 399/2017 lodged by the

non-applicant no. 2 against the applicants in Police Station, Ramtek,

District Nagpur for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Order accordingly. No costs.

                 JUDGE                                            JUDGE


wasnik




                                                                                         ...../-