Bombay High Court
Ukanda Kasna Rathod And Another vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ... on 19 September, 2017
Bench: P.N. Deshmukh
cwp672.17 1/4
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.672 OF 2017.
PETITIONERS : 1. Ukanda Kasna Rathod,
age 57 years, Occu: Agrist.
R/o Shendurjana - Adhav,
Tq.Manora, Distt.Washim.
2. Sau.Sunita Murlidhar Raut,
aged 40 years, Occu: Nil, R/o
Shendurjana - Adhav, Tq.Manora,
Distt.Washim.
..VERSUS..
RESPONDENT : State of Maharashtra, through
Police Station Officer, Asegaon,
Distt.Washim.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mr.P.S.Patil, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mrs.S.S.Jachak, Addl.Public Prosecutor for the State.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
CORAM : P.N. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 19th SEPTEMBER, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by
consent of learned counsel of both the parties.
cwp672.17 2/4
2. Prayer in this petition is to direct the Investigating Officer,
P.S.Asegaon, Distt.Washim to file supplementary charge-sheet in Crime
No.45 of 2009 for the offence punishable under Sections 403, 409,
420, 465 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and till then to
grant stay to proceedings being R.C.C.No.75 of 2013 pending on the
file of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Washim. Lastly, it is prayed
that impugned order dated 13th July, 2017 passed by learned Court of
Chief Judicial Magistrate be quashed and set aside, by which request
made by petitioners for directions to the Investigating Officer to file
supplementary charge-sheet came to be rejected.
3. According to the learned counsel for petitioners, such a
direction is necessary to be passed to the Police Station concerned, in
view of submissions made by Investigating Officer on 17 th January,
2011 before the learned trial Court that supplementary charge-sheet
shall be filed within stipulated period. It appears that inspite of such
statement made by the Investigating Officer, no such supplementary
charge-sheet is filed and therefore, petitioners who are accused before
the trial Court, have filed application for direction to the Police Station
Asegaon to file supplementary charge-sheet.
cwp672.17 3/4
4. Perusal of impugned order would reveal that the learned
counsel who appeared for petitioners before the learned trial Court,
failed to point out any provision under the Law, for issuing such
directions to the Investigating Officer to file supplementary charge-
sheet. Perusal of facts involved in the petition would reveal that this
case is in respect of misappropriation of Government money. The FIR
was lodged on 24th November, 2009. The Charge has been framed on
15th November, 2014. Apparently, the case is more than 5 years old.
The petitioners/accused persons are requesting to direct the
investigator to file supplementary charge-sheet against Bank Manger
Natrajan. The accused persons have not pointed out that the non-filing
of charge-sheet by the Investigator against the said Natrajan is coming
in way of their defence or causing any prejudice to them.
5. In view of facts involved as aforesaid, there is no substance
in the petition more particularly, if during the course of enquiry or trial
it appears from the evidence that any person not being accused has
committed any offence for which such person could be tried with the
petitioners, the Court is always empowered to proceed against such
accused person under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
In view of facts as aforesaid and powers vested with the learned trial
cwp672.17 4/4
Court, petition is liable to be dismissed. Hence, petition stands
disposed of as dismissed. Rule is discharged.
JUDGE
chute
