Mr. Avinash S/O Sudhakarrao Gajbe vs State Of Mah. Thr Deptt Of Home ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 633 Bom

                                                                             criwp411.19.odt
                                              1

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

                  CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 411/2019

PETITIONER :                Mr. Avinash Sudhakarrao Gajbe,
                            Age 37 years, Occupation - Private,
                            R/o. Plot No.3, Jugal Kishor Layout,
                            Gopal Nagar, Nagpur

                                        ...VERSUS...

RESPONDENTS:              1. State of Maharashtra, through Department
                             of Home, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

                          2. Commissioner of Police,
                             Nagpur City, Nagpur.

                          3. Police Station Officer,
                               Police Station Pratap Nagar,
                               Nagpur.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Shri Rajnish Vyas, Advocate for petitioner
                 Ms. Hemlata Jaipurkar, APP for Respondents.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
                                                        AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.

                                       DATE          : 12/01/2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)


.1]              Heard the respective counsel for the parties.


2]               Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

criwp411.19.odt

3] The petitioner claims that he is a person who belongs to

Gond-Gowari Tribe and has interest in the welfare of Adiwasi

Gowari Samaj Association. According to him, there were several

instances noticed by him, which revealed misappropriation of huge

amount belonging to the Association committed by one Kailash Raut

and Surendra Raut, the office bearers of the Association. Therefore,

he filed the complaint with Police Station Rana Pratap Nagar,

Nagpur, on 19.04.2019 for setting criminal law in motion against the

said two persons, but in vain. Now, the petitioner has approached

this Court seeking direction to the Commissioner of Police i.e.

respondent No.2, to act upon the representation, which he sent on

21.04.2019 to the respondents whereby he has forwarded the

complaint dated 19.04.2019. He has also sought criminal direction

against the Police Officer of Police Station Rana Pratap Nagar,

Nagpur.

4] Shri Vyas, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that even though it is stated in the reply that audit was got

conducted by the Society and the audit report has not revealed any

irregularity or any kind of misappropriation, the petitioner would criwp411.19.odt

need to verify the correctness of the audit and for that purpose, the

petitioner would have to obtain the copy of the audit report. He

submits that as the copy of the audit report has been supplied with

the reply, it would have facilitated its such examination by the

petitioner. But, he submits that the petitioner can very well do so in

due course of time and if permitted by this Court, the petitioner

would withdraw this petition with liberty to file afresh a complaint

against office bearers or persons responsible for misappropriation of

Association's funds, if any fresh material is collected by the

petitioner.

5] According to the learned APP, no cognizable offence

has been disclosed against the persons named in the complaint

dated 19.04.2019 and therefore, this matter be dismissed.

6] We would have ordinarily granted permission to

withdraw the petition with liberty as prayed for, had there been an

effort taken by the petitioner before approaching this Court to

collect necessary material and mention the relevant facts and

circumstances in its complaint, so that some bonafides could be seen

in the action of the petitioner in filing the criminal complaint and criwp411.19.odt

also this petition. But, on perusal of the complaint dated

19.04.2019, it appears to us that the petitioner made general rather

wild allegations against the persons named therein without giving

necessary details to support those allegations. The petitioner by

filing this petition made an attempt to seek roving enquiry through

the process of law so that whatever purpose he desires to seek in

this case is achieved. Now, as the audit of the accounts has been

conducted by the association and it has also been examined by the

Tribal Development Department, which discloses no irregularity and

no misappropriation during the relevant period, no leave to

withdraw the petition with liberty as prayed for can be granted. If it

is granted, it would only encourage the persons like the petitioner to

keep stoking the fire of litigation for achieving his own purpose,

which is not known to us.

7] In the result, we do not find any substance in the

petition and the petition deserves to be dismissed. The petition

stands dismissed. Rule is discharged.

                       JUDGE                                    JUDGE
Rvjalit
                                                              Digitally signed
                                                     Rajesh   by Rajesh Jalit
                                                              Date:
                                                     Jalit    2021.01.14
                                                              11:01:17 +0530