Bombay High Court
Nitin S/O Prakash Patil And 2 ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso, ... on 17 August, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande, Amit B. Borkar
1 Cri.APL No.781.21-J.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 781 OF 2021
1. Nitin S/o. Prakash Patil,
Aged about 40 years, Occ. Agriculturist,
R/o. Khedgaon, Mominabad,
Tahsil-Nandura, Distt.-Buldhana.
2. Balu S/o. Rupaji Damodar,
Aged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculturist,
3. Kiran S/o. Balu Damodar,
Aged about 31 years, Occ. Agriculturist,
Both the applicant No.2 and 3 are
R/o. Ganpati Nagar, Part -1, Malkapur,
Dist. - Buldhana. ......APPLICANTS
... VERSUS ...
The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Nandura Police Station,
Tahsil - Nandura, Dist. Buldhana. ......NON-APPLICANT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Amit R. Prasad, Advocate for the Applicants.
Shri S. S. Doifode, Additional Public Prosecutor for the Non-applicant/State.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATE : 17.08.2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)
1. Heard.
2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
3. This joint application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure is filed by the accused and the complainant for
quashing and setting aside the First Information Report
No.333/2021 dated 20.06.2021 registered against the applicant
Nos.2 and 3 by the applicant No.1.
4. The First Information Report came to be registered at
the instance of the applicant No.1 alleging that the applicant
Nos.2 and 3 assaulted the applicant No.1. It is alleged that the
applicant No.2 assaulted the applicant No.1 with sword on his left
hand and threatened him with dire consequences. It is also
alleged that the applicant no.2 snatched golden chain, golden ring
and cash of Rs.10,000/- from the applicant No.1 and threatened
to kill him.
5. The applicant No.2 also lodged the First Information
Report No.331/2021 dated 20.06.2021 for the offences under
Sections 323, 392, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections
3(1)(r) and 3(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the accused
persons named in the complaint.
6. During pendency of the present application, the
applicants have mutually resolved their dispute and have decided
to withdraw the prosecution lodged against each other. It is stated
that the offences alleged against the applicant Nos.2 and 3 are
personal in nature.
7. We have carefully considered the allegations in the First
Information Report. On careful allegations in the First Information
Report, we are satisfied that the ingredients of the offences alleged
against the applicant Nos.2 and 3 including offences under the
provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, are not made out. The
allegations made against the applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are vague in
nature and are not sufficient to constitute the offences alleged
against the applicant Nos.2 and 3. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab & anr.
reported in (2014) AIR SCW 2065. The decision of the Hon'ble
Apex Court makes it clear that the Court cannot declare to quash
the First Information Report merely because the First Information
Report incorporates a particular provision which is a serious
offence or offence against society. The Court has to make an
endeavour to find out whether the information in the First
Information Report indeed discloses the ingredients of such
offence and the Court can accept the settlement and quash the
report/charge-sheet only after the Court is of the opinion that
such an offence is unnecessarily incorporated in the First
Information Report/charge-sheet.
8. From the perusal of the First Information Report and the
material produced in the Court, we are satisfied that the
ingredients of the offence under Section 324, 394 of the Indian
Penal Code are not fulfilled. Since the applicants have mutually
resolved their dispute, chances of conviction are bleak.
9. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Narinder Singh (supra) and in view of settlement of
dispute between the parties, there is no impediment in quashing
the First Information Report against the applicant Nos.2 and 3.
We therefore, pass the following order :
10. The First Information Report No.333/2021 dated
20.06.2021 registered against the applicant Nos.2 and 3 for the
offences under Sections 324, 394, 504 and 506, of the Indian
Penal Code is quashed and set aside.
11. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Pending
application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
JUDGE JUDGE
RGurnule
