Bombay High Court
Bandu @ Pandhari S/O Parashram ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 22 January, 2021
Bench: Z.A. Haq, Amit B. Borkar
1 cr-apl-95-16j.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 95 OF 2016
1. Bandu @ Pandhari S/o. Parashram Gote,
Aged about 40 years, Occ. Agriculturist
2. Vithal S/o. Madhav Gote,
Aged about 40 years, Occ. Agriculturist
3. Vilas S/o. Madhav Gote,
Aged about 32 years, Occ. Agriculturist
4. Madhav S/o. Nimbaji Gote,
Aged about 60 years, Occ. Agriculturist
5. Arun S/o. Ramdas Gote,
Aged about 28 years,
6. Sau. Ratnamal W/o. Pandhari Gote
Aged about 35 years, Occ. Agriculturist
7. Samindrabai W/o. Parashram Gote,
Aged about 65 years, Occ. Agriculturist
8. Smt. Nandabai Ramdas Gote,
Aged about 50 years, Occ. Agriculturist
9. Panchfula W/o. Madhav Gote,
Aged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculturist
10. Kastura Vitthal Gote,
Aged about 28 years, Occ. Agriculturist
11. Varsha S/o. Vilas Gote,
Aged about 28 years, Occ. Agriculturist
All are residents of Village Tondgaon,
Tah. & Dist. Washim. . . . APPLICANTS
...V E R S U S..
::: Uploaded on - 28/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 08/02/2021 14:59:39 :::
2 cr-apl-95-16j.odt
1. State of Maharashtra through
Police Station Officer, Washim Gramin,
Tah. & Dist. Washim.
2. Eknath S/o. Nivrutti Dhadve,
Aged about 47 years,
R/o. At Post Tondgaon,
Tah. & Dist. Washim. . . . NON-APPLICANTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Amol S. Deshpande, Advocate for applicants.
Ms. Mayuri Deshpande, A.P.P. for non-applicant no. 1/State.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM :- Z. A. HAQ AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED :- 22.01.2021
JUDGMENT (PER : AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) :-
1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure challenging the First Information Report (FIR) No.
14/2016 registered with the non-applicant no. 1-Police Station on
12.01.2016 under Sections 146, 147, 148, 149, 323, 504 and 506 of
the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes
and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in
short, "the Act of 1989").
2. The FIR came to be registered against the applicants with
accusation that the applicants assaulted the non-applicant no.
2/informant and hurled abuses in the name of caste of the non-
applicant no. 2. The applicants, therefore, approached this Court by
3 cr-apl-95-16j.odt
way of present application. This Court on 15.02.2016 issued notice to
the non-applicants. By way of ad-interim relief it was directed that
charge-sheet may not be filed.
3. In pursuance of the notice, the non-applicant no. 1 has filed
reply. In the reply, it is stated that the applicants were knowing about
the caste of the non-applicant no. 2 and intentionally abused the non-
applicant no. 2. It is also stated that there is sufficient material to
show complicity of the present applicants in the crime.
4. We have carefully considered the contents of the FIR, it
appears that before filing of the FIR, there was Regular Civil Suit No.
119/2015 for relief of permanent and mandatory injunction filed by
the non-applicant no. 2 against the applicants in respect of raising of
compound wall. It also appears that from 26.06.2015, the non-
applicant no. 2 could not get the relief of temporary injunction. From
the FIR, it appears that the said report was lodged on 12.01.2016.
5. Insofar as the allegations under the provisions of the Act of
1989 is concerned, the allegations are vague in nature. There is no
specific role assigned to any of the applicants. Omnibus allegations
against the applicants are not sufficient to attract ingredients of offence
punishable under the provisions of the Act of 1989.
4 cr-apl-95-16j.odt
6. On overall consideration of failure to get relief in the Civil
dispute which led to registration of FIR, and vague nature of
allegations against the applicants, we are satisfied that the FIR
registered against the applicants deserves to be quashed and set aside.
We are satisfied that continuation of proceeding would amount to
abuse of process of Court.
7. We therefore pass the following order :-
First Information Report No. 14/2016, dated 12.01.2016
registered with the non-applicant no. 1-Police Station for offence
punishable under Sections 146, 147, 148, 149, 323, 504 and 506 of
the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes
and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is
quashed and set aside.
JUDGE JUDGE
RR Jaiswal
