Bombay High Court
Yogesh Mukund Khawaskar And 12 ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 19 July, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande, Amit B. Borkar
Judgment 1 apl680.21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 680/2021
1] Shri Yogesh Mukund Khawaskar,
Aged about 33 years, Occ. Service,
Presently posted as J.E. Civil,
Garrison Engineer, Military Engineering
Services, Kargil
Also at 205, Panchsheel Ward,
Near Gajanan Mandir, Sakola,
Bhandara 441 802
2] Mukund S/O Sitaram Khawaskar,
Aged about 61 years, Occ. Retired,
R/O. 205, Panchsheel Ward,
Near Gajanan Mandir, Sakoli,
Bhandara 441 802
3] Sumitra W/O Mukund Khawaskar,
Aged about 51 years, Occ. Household
R/O. 205, Panchsheel Ward,
Near Gajanan Mandir, Sakoli,
Bhandara 441 802
4] Pallavi W/O Vijay @ Sameer Ingole,
Aged about 33 years, Occ. Household,
R/O. Ward No. 6, Vaishali Ward,
Gadchandur, Tah. Korpana, Dist. Chandrapur
5] Vijay @ Sameer S/O Madhav Ingole,
Aged about 38 years, Occ. Service
R/O. Ward No. 6, Vaishali Ward, Gadchandur,
Tah. Korpana, Dist. Chandrapur
6] Rajesh S/O Sitaram Khawaskar,
Aged about 51 years, Occ. Service
R/O. Thavre Nagar, Murmadi,
Tal. Lakhani, Dist. Bhandara
7] Anita W/O Rajesh Khawaskar,
Aged about 50 years, Occ. Household,
R/O. Thavre Nagar, Murmadi,
Tal Lakhani, Dist. Bhandara
ANSARI
::: Uploaded on - 26/07/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 22/09/2021 04:01:30 :::
Judgment 2 apl680.21.odt
8] Wasanta S/O Dajiba Singade,
Aged about 62 years, Occ. Labour
R/O. Subhash Ward, Mohdura, Bhandara
9] Mangala W/O Devidas Ingole,
Aged about 51 years, Occ. Household
R/O. Bhande Plot, Seva Dal Nagar, Nagpur
10] Anil S/O Devidas Ingole,
Aged about 28 years, Occ. Labour
R/O. Bhande Plot, Seva Dal Nagar, Nagpur
11] Pravin S/O Devidas Ingole,
Aged about 25 years, Occ. Labour
R/O. Bhande Plot, Seva Dal Nagar, Nagpur
12] Vishnu S/O Sitaram Khawaskar,
Aged about 48 years, Occ. Labour
R/O. C/O. Bhanudas Pal, Near Gajanan Hall,
Mauda, Dist. Nagpur
13] Mrs. Jyoti @ Madhavi Yogesh Khawaskar
@ Jyoti @ Madhavi Gautam Khobragade,
Aged about 28 years, Occ. Nil
R/O. C/O. Gautam Raghobaji Khobragade,
Block No. 12, Quarter No. 95, Ekta Nagar Colony,
Bhadrawati, Dist. Chandrapur
.... APPLICANT(S)
// VERSUS //
State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Sakoli Police Station, Bhandara
.... NON-APPLICANT
*******************************************************************
Shri G. Agrawal, Advocate for the applicant nos. 1 to 12
Ms. M.A. Barabde, APP for the non-applicant
*******************************************************************
CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
JULY 19, 2021
JUDGMENT : (PER:- AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)
ANSARI
Judgment 3 apl680.21.odt
1] Heard.
2] RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith.
3] The applicants have filed joint application under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging registration of F.I.R.
No. 146/2018 dated 28/04/2018 for the offences punishable under Sections
498-A, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants have also
challenged filing of the charge-sheet and R.C.C. No. 31/2018 pending before
the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sakoli, Bhandara.
4] The first information report came to be registered against the
applicant nos. 1 to 12 by the applicant no. 13 with the accusations that the
applicant nos. 1 to 12 physically and mentally harassed the applicant no. 13.
The Investigating Agency carried out the investigation and filed charge-sheet.
5] During the pendency of the criminal proceedings, the parties
have arrived at settlement and have filed consent terms in Family Court
Appeal No. 45/2019. The copy of the order passed by this Court in Family
Court Appeal No. 45/2019 alongwith Civil Application (CAO) No. 746/2020
is placed on record wherein the parties have decided to withdraw all the
allegations against each other and have agreed to withdraw all the
proceedings against each other. The present application has been affirmed by
the applicant no. 13.
ANSARI
Judgment 4 apl680.21.odt
6] Having carefully considered the allegations in the first
information report and the material produced before this Court in the form
of charge-sheet, we are satisfied that the offences against the applicant
nos. 1 to 12 are personal in nature. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582 has
taken a view that when the parties have arrived at settlement and the
chances of conviction are bleak, it is advisable not to burden the Criminal
Courts which are already overburdened. It is held that the time saved from
such settlement can be utilized for other deserving work.
7] In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) and in view of the settlement
between the applicant nos. 1 to 12 and applicant no. 13, we are satisfied that
the first information report, consequent charge-sheet and proceedings i.e.
R.C.C. No. 31/2018 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Sakoli, Bhandara against the applicant nos. 1 to 12 deserve to be
quashed and set aside.
8] Hence, the following order:-
F.I.R. No. 146/2018 dated 28/04/2018 registered with the non-
applicant - Police Station, consequent charge-sheet and R.C.C.
No. 31/2018 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate
ANSARI
Judgment 5 apl680.21.odt
First Class, Sakoli, Bhandara against the applicant nos. 1 to 12
for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 and 34 of
the Indian Penal Code are quashed and set aside.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Pending
application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(JUDGE) (JUDGE)
ANSARI
