Tushar S/O. Babubhai Luhar And ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O. ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1266 Bom

 Judgment                                   1                                apl327.18.odt




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


                   CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 327 OF 2018



 1.     Tushar S/o. Babubhai Luhar,
        Aged about 44 years, Occupation :
        Medical Practitioner/Business,
        R/o. Mira Bhayandar Road,
        Near Petrol Pump, Mira Road,
        Thane (East)

 2.     Sunyana W/o. Tushar Luhar,
        Aged about 32 years, Occupation:
        Household, R/o. Mira Bhayandar Road,
        Near Petrol Pump, Mira Road,
        Thane (East)

                                                                   .... APPLICANTS.

                                    // VERSUS //


 1.    State of Maharashtra,
       Through P.S.O., P.S. Gitti-Khadan,
       Nagpur.

 2.    Jagdish S/o. Purushottam Patel,
       Aged about 30 years, Occ.: Business,
       R/o. Jeewandeep Society, Bharat Mata
       Uddyan, Central Avenue, Nagpur.
                                                             .... NON-APPLICANTS.
  ___________________________________________________________________
 Shri C.A.Babrekar, Advocate for Applicants.
 Shri S.D.Sirpurkar, A.P.P. for Non-applicant No.1/State.
 Shri Sachin Jaiswal, Advocate for Non-applicant No.2.
 ___________________________________________________________________

                         CORAM : Z.A.HAQ AND AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED : JANUARY 19, 2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : Amit Borkar, J.)

Judgment 2 apl327.18.odt

1. Heard.

2. RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

3. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure challenging First Information Report No.599 of 2017,

dated 9th October 2014, registered with non-applicant No.1-Police Station for

the offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal

Code.

4. The First Information Report came to be registered against the

applicants with the accusation that the applicant No.1 from time to time

booked tickets with the non-applicant No.2 and has not paid amount of

Rs.3,35,000/- towards payment of Railway and Airline tickets purchased by

the applicant. The applicants have, therefore, filed present Criminal

Application challenging registration of the First Information Report.

5. This Court on 5th April 2018 issued notice to the non-applicants

and by way of ad-interim relief it was directed that charge-sheet should not

be filed against the applicants.

6. The non-applicant No.1 has filed reply and it is stated that from

the material available with the prosecution, there is sufficient evidence in

Judgment 3 apl327.18.odt

support of the allegations made against the applicants. It is further stated in

the reply that the applicant No.1 has booked various tickets with the non-

applicant No.2 who is working as Booking Agent. It is also stated that the

applicant No.1 impersonated himself as a Doctor and induced the non-

applicant No.2 to book tickets for the applicants.

7. We have considered the contents of the First Information

Report and the reply filed by the non-applicant No.1. On careful

consideration of the First Information Report, it appears that the allegation

against the applicant is to the effect that he induced the non-applicant No.2

to book tickets on behalf of the applicant and has travelled on the said

tickets. The essential allegation against the applicant No.1 is that he has not

paid the amount of tickets. There is no allegation against the applicant No.2.

On overall assessment of the First Information Report and the reply filed by

the Non-applicant No.1, we are satisfied that the dispute between the

applicant and the non-applicant No.2 is civil dispute for recovery of the

amount. On prima-facie, assessment of the allegations and the reply, we are

satisfied that the essential ingredients of the offence under Sections 419 and

420 of the Indian Penal Code are not made out from the material available

on record. We, therefore, satisfied that the continuation of the proceedings

against the applicants will amount to abuse of process of law.

Judgment 4 apl327.18.odt

8. We, therefore, pass the following order:

First Information Report bearing Crime No. 599 of 2017, dated

9th October 2017, registered with non-applicant No.1-Police Station for the

offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code is

quashed and set aside.

Rule is made absolute accordingly.

                             (AMIT B. BORKAR, J)                        (Z.A.HAQ, J)


RRaut..