Asifoddin Nijamoddin Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 2318 Bom

                                                                      105-Criappl-99-2020.odt


                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    105 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.99 OF 2020

                        ASIFODDIN NIJAMODDIN SHAIKH
                                    VERSUS
                      THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

                                        ...
                   Advocate for Applicant : Mrs. Kazi Sabahat T.
                    APP for Respondents/State: Mr. A. S. Shinde
                  Advocate for Respondent No.2: Mr. S. H. Pathan
                                        ...


                                    CORAM   :   T.V. NALAWADE &
                                                M.G. SEWLIKAR, JJ.


                                    DATE    :   04.02.2021



ORAL JUDGMENT :

.                Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard both

the sides for final disposal.



2.               The present proceeding is filed for relief of quashing of Crime

No.265 of 2019 registered with Azad Nagar Police Station, Dhule District

Dhule for the offence punishable under Sections 326, 323, 504 and 506

of the Indian Penal Code.



3.               This Court has carefully gone through the allegations made in

the FIR. There is allegation that by using fighter, a blow was given on the


                                                                                         1/2




     ::: Uploaded on - 05/02/2021                  ::: Downloaded on - 06/02/2021 02:32:27 :::
                                                                      105-Criappl-99-2020.odt


face of the informant by accused and due to that he sustained bleeding

injury and he lost four teeth. During arguments, learned counsel for the

applicant and informant submitted that the parties have settled the

dispute. Affidavit to that effect of the informant is filed. In the affidavit,

the informant has contended that he has no objection to grant the relief.

He has given different account of the injury sustained by him. By way of

precaution, this Court had asked the learned APP to collect antecedents of

the applicant. Learned APP submitted on instructions that the applicant

has no bad antecedents. In view of these circumstances, this Court holds

that relief needs to be given. Nothing can be achieved if the applicant is

asked to face trial for aforesaid offence. In view of the circumstance that

the informant has no intention to give evidence.               In the result, the

following order:

                                   ORDER

a) Application is allowed.

b) Relief is granted in terms of prayer clause 'B'. Rule made

absolute in those terms.

(M.G. SEWLIKAR, J.) (T.V. NALAWADE, J.)

Sameer