Ashish Diliprao Wardhe And Others vs Police Station Officer Police ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 7346 Bom

                                          1                                      jg.apl 617.17.odt

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

                 Criminal Application (APL) No. 617 of 2017

(1) Ashish Diliprao Wardhe, 
      aged about 25 years, occupation : labour

(2) Sushil Digambar Sardar,
      aged about 26 years, occupation : student 

(3) Pintu @ Roshan Ranjan Wardhe,
      aged about 26 years, occupation : student 

(4) Chetan Rajendra Wardhe,
      aged about 20 years, occupation : student 

(5) Subhash Ambadas Kaware,
      aged about 70 years, occupation : nil 

      All r/o Pandhari Kholapur, Tq. Bhatkuli, 
      District Amravati.                                                     .... Applicants

      //  Versus //

Police Station Officer, 
Police Station, Kholapur, 
Amravati Rural, Dist. Amravati.                                       .... Non-Applicant

Shri Vinay Dahat, Advocate for the applicants 
Shri K. R. Lule, Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant
                                                     
                                    CORAM      : SMT. VASANTI  A  NAIK AND
                                                  M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
                                     DATE  : 20-09-2017.

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

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The criminal

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

.....2/-

2 jg.apl 617.17.odt

the learned counsel for the parties.

2. By the present application, the applicants prayed to quash

and set aside the charge-sheet pending before the Judicial Magistrate

First Class, Court No. 1, Bhatkuli vide Summary Criminal Case No.

317/2017. It is submitted that the complainant/applicant no. 5 Subhash

Kaware lodged the report against the applicant nos. 1 to 4. Police has

registered the offences punishable under Sections 336, 294 and 506 read

with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the complainant/applicant no. 5 lodged

the report due to misunderstanding, therefore, prayed to quash and set

aside the charge-sheet.

4. Heard learned counsel for the applicants. He has submitted

that the applicants have settled their dispute. He prayed to quash and set

aside the charge-sheet.

5. Today, all the applicants are present before the Court. We

have asked the applicant no. 5, he has stated that due to

misunderstanding, he lodged the report. He prayed to quash and set

aside the FIR/charge-sheet pending against the applicant nos. 1 to 4.

The applicant no. 5 is aged about 70 years. He has stated that he has

.....3/-

3 jg.apl 617.17.odt

good relations with the applicant nos. 1 to 4. To keep relations good

forever, they have decided to compound the offence.

6. It is clear from the submissions of the applicant no. 5 that

there is no possibility of any conviction as the complainant/applicant

no. 5 will not give any evidence against the applicant nos. 1 to 4. In view

of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gian

Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another (2012) 10 SCC 303 and

Narinder Singh and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and anr. (2014) 6 SCC

466, charge-sheet is liable to be quashed and set aside.

7. Hence, we allow the criminal application in terms of prayer

clauses (1) and (2). The charge-sheet pending before the Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Court No. 1, Bhatkuli vide Summary Criminal Case

No. 317/2017 is hereby quashed and set aside.

                      JUDGE                                          JUDGE



wasnik




                                                                                          ...../-