Satishkumar Omprakash Singh And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 10483 Bom

                                                 1/5                            18-APL-104-2021.doc




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                    CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 104 OF 2021

Satishkumar Singh & Others.                                    ...Applicants

         Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                                ...Respondents
                                 ...
Mr. Gautam T. Kanchanpurkar for applicants.
Mr. Abhijeet Kandarkar for Respondent No. 2.
Mrs. S.D. Shinde, APP for State.
                                 ...
                         CORAM : S. S. SHINDE &
                                     N. J. JAMADAR, JJ.

DATE : 6th AUGUST, 2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER S.S. SHINDE, J.]:

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the

consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants and 2 nd respondent

jointly submit that the parties have amicably settled the dispute.

The Respondent No. 2 has filed the affidavit to that effect. It appears

that on 16.02.2021, the 2nd respondent was present before this

Court (Coram: S.S. Shinde & Manish Pitale, JJ.) and this Court had

interacted with the Respondent No. 2 and it was stated by the said

respondent that it is his voluntary act to enter into the settlement

and join the prayer of applicants for quashing the impugned

FIR/proceedings.

Bhagyawant Punde





                                           2/5                           18-APL-104-2021.doc

3. The parties are identified by their respective advocates.

Learned counsel appearing for applicants and 2 nd respondent jointly

submit that as on today, there is no change in stand of the parties

to resolve the dispute through amicable settlement.

4. Learned APP on instructions of concerned police station

submits that there are no criminal antecedents at the credit of

present applicants.

5. The Respondent No. 2 has filed the affidavit. Paragraphs

2 and 3 of the said affidavit read as under:-

2. I say that after registration of the said crime the applicants approached me and they proposed me to settle the dispute between us. I say that with the help of elders and reputed persons in the society we settled our dispute amicably out of the Court and therefore I have decided to resolve our dispute. Accordingly, the applicants agreed to give one flat. As agreed, the applicants have executed a registered agreement of sale in my favour by transferring Flat No. 206, Second floor, Wing F, area admeasuring about 333.90 Sp.ft i.e. 31.03 Sq. mtrs, Type A1 in the Building No. 02, known as 'Ideal Park' on 20/03/2020. The copy of said agreement is annexed with the Criminal Application at Exhibit-B.

3. I say that in the above circumstances, as the dispute between myself and the applicants has been amicably settled, I don't want to proceed

Bhagyawant Punde

3/5 18-APL-104-2021.doc

further with the prosecution against the applicants. I thereby issue my NO- OBJECTION for quashing the crime bearing F.I.R. No. I-134 of 2019 dated 30/05/2019 registered with the Palhar Police Station against the applicants for the offences punishable under Section 420, 406, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and also the Regular Criminal Case No. 291 of 2019 on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Palghar against the applicants.

6. Since the parties have amicably settled the dispute and

to that effect the 2nd respondent has filed the affidavit, no fruitful

purpose will be served by continuing the further proceedings i.e.

Regular Criminal Case No. 291 of 2019 pending on the file of

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Palghar, arising out of FIR

No. I-134 of 2019 dated 30/05/2019 registered with Palghar Policie

Station for the offences punishable under Section 420, 406 and 34

of Indian Penal Code.

7. Since the 2nd respondent has joined the prayer of

applicants for quashing the impugned FIR/prosecution, the

Respondent No. 2 will not going to support the allegations in the

FIR and hence, the chances of conviction of applicants are bleak

and remote.

Bhagyawant Punde





                                         4/5                        18-APL-104-2021.doc

8. The Supreme Court in the case of Giansingh v. State of

Punjab and Another1 has held that, the criminal cases having

overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil flavour stand on a

different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the

offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil,

partnership or such like transactions or the offence arising out of

matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the

wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have

resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, the High

Court may quash the criminal proceedings if in its view, because of

the compromise between the offender and the victim, the possibility

of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal

case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and

extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the

criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise

with the victim. It is further held that, as inherent power is of wide

plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in

accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz.: (I) to secure

the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any

court.

1    2012 (10) SCC 303

Bhagyawant Punde





                                           5/5                          18-APL-104-2021.doc

9. In the light of discussion in foregoing paragraphs, to

secure the ends of justice and prevent the abuse of the proceess of

the Court, the application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the

application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b) and (c), which

read thus:-

(b) To quash and set aside Crime bearing F.I.R. No. I-134 of 2019 dated 30/05/2019 registered with the Palghar Police Station against the applicants for the offences punishable under Section 420, 406, 34 of the Indian Penal Code;

(c) To quash and set aside the Regular Criminal Case No. 291 of 2019 on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Palghar against the applicants;

10. Rule made absolute to aforesaid extent. The application

stands disposed of.

11. Parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order.

( N. J. JAMADAR, J.) (S. S. SHINDE, J.)

Bhagyawant Punde