Bombay High Court
Jagdish Harchand Punjabi And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 26 February, 2021
Bench: S.S. Shinde, Manish Pitale
Sherla V.
909_apl.1584.2019.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1584 OF 2019
1. Jagdish Harchand Punjabi
... Applicant
2. Samrjit Jagdamba Shukla
Vs.
1. State of Maharashtra
... Respondents
2. Bharati Rajkumar Gulwani
Mr.P.V. Nichani with Ms.Sayali Puri and Samruddhi Warang for the
Applicant
Ms.M.H. Mhatre, APP, for Respondent - State
Mr.Devendra Singh for Respondent No.2
CORAM: S.S. SHINDE &
MANISH PITALE, JJ.
DATED: FEBRUARY 26, 2021
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER S.S. SHINDE, J.) :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with the consent of the
learned Counsel appearing for the parties and heard finally.
2. This Application is filed for the following substantive reliefs:
"a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to invoke its power
under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure and quash
and/or set aside the FIR bearing No.444 of 2018, registered
by the Vakola Police Station at Mumbai.
909_apl.1584.2019.doc
b) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to invoke its power
under section 482 of Cr.P.C. and quash and / or set aside
Case No.1280/PW/2019 pending before Metropolitan
magistrate, 71st Court at Bandra."
3. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicants and
Respondent No.2 submits that the applicants and Respondent
No.2 have amicably settled the dispute. The learned Counsel
appearing for Respondent No.2 has tendered across the bar
consent affidavit; the same is taken on record. It would be apt to
reproduce hereinbelow paragraphs 1 and 2 of the said consent
affidavit as under:
"1. I say that the applicant is my real brother. I say that
along with my other sisters, there was a dispute with respect
to a shop premises against my brother and in the said
skirmish inadvertently there happened to be an offence
committed by the Applicant herein which I realised later that
the alleged offence happened without any intention. I say
that I had filed C.R. No.444 of 2018 on Dt.04/11/2018 at
Vakola Police Station with respect to the alleged offence
being the subject matter of the present Criminal Application.
2. I say that the Applicant abovenamed has filed quashing
petition under section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code on
the basis of the memorandum of Settlement/Understanding
that has taken place between the Applicant, myself and other
sisters who are the siblings of the Applicant and respondent
no.2 herein. I say that by virtue of the said arrangement,
myself and the Applicant have decided to withdraw the case
against each other and hence pursuant to the same, I do
hereby grant my consent for quashing of C.R. No.444 of
909_apl.1584.2019.doc
2018 which is the subject matter of the present Criminal
Application."
4. Respondent No.2 is present. She has stated that it is her
voluntary act without any coercion to arrive at an amicable
settlement with the applicants. She stated that in view of the
settlement, the impugned First Information Report may be
quashed.
5. Respondent No.2 is the real sister of applicant No.1. Since
the Applicants and Respondent No.2 have amicably settled the
dispute and Respondent No.2 has joined the prayer of the
applicants for quashing the impugned FIR, no fruitful purpose will
be served by continuing the investigation of C.R. No.444 of 2018
registered with Vakola Police Station, Mumbai. In view of the
settlement, the chances of conviction of the applicants would be
bleak and remote.
6. 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
1 2012 (10) SCC 303
909_apl.1584.2019.doc
offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil,
partnership or such like transactions or the offences 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.
7. In view of the amicable settlement, keeping in view the
consent affidavit filed by Respondent No.2 and in order to secure
the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of Court, the
Application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the Criminal
909_apl.1584.2019.doc
Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b), which
read as under:
"a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to invoke its power
under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure and quash
and/or set aside the FIR bearing No.444 of 2018, registered
by the Vakola Police Station at Mumbai.
b) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to invoke its power
under section 482 of Cr.P.C. and quash and / or set aside
Case No.1280/PW/2019 pending before Metropolitan
magistrate, 71st Court at Bandra."
8. The parties shall strictly abide by the consent terms.
9. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. Criminal
Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(MANISH PITALE, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)
Digitally
signed by
Vishwanath
Vishwanath S. Sherla
S. Sherla Date:
2021.03.01
14:47:07
+0530
