Manvir Singh Nehal Singh Kaushal ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 9486 Bom

                                                 1/6                             14-APL-537-2021.doc




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                    CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 537 OF 2021

Manvir Singh Nehal Singh Kaushal & Anr.                        ...Applicants

         Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                                ...Respondents
                                 ...
Mr. Rupesh R. Lanjekar for applicants.
Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 present through video conferencing.
Mr. Sameer P. Nangre for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
Respondent No. 2 and 3 present through video conferencing.
Mrs. M.H. Mhatre, APP for State.
                                 ...

                                        CORAM : S. S. SHINDE &
                                                N. J. JAMADAR, JJ.

DATE : 19th JULY, 2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER S.S. SHINDE, J.]:

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the

consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. This application is filed with following substantive

prayer:-

(a) That the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside proceedings bearing CC. No. 72/PW/ 2021 arising out of C.R. No. 537 of 2020 registered at Bhandup Police Station, Mumbai for offence u/s.

323, 324, 504, 506, 34 of I.P.C. and pending before the LD. Metropolitan Magistrate 53rd Court, Mulund,

Bhagyawant Punde

2/6 14-APL-537-2021.doc

Mumbai, aginast the Applicants, on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant in the circumstance of the case;

3. Learned counsel appearing for applicants and

Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 jointly submit that the parties have

amicably settled the dispute and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have

filed affidavit thereby giving consent for quashing the impugned FIR

and chargesheet.

4. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are present before this Court,

through video conferencing. We have interacted with them. They

stated that it is their voluntary act, without any force or coercion, to

enter into the amicable settlement and give consent for quashing

the impugned FIR and chargeshsheet. Parties have assureed this

Court that henceforth they will not indulge into such activities.

5. Respondent No. 2 has filed his affidavit before this

Court. Paragraphs 1 to 5 of the said affidavit read as under:-

1. I say that on 26/10/2020, I have lodged an F.I.R. bearing Cr No. 537/2020 for offence u/s. 323, 324, 504, 506, 34 of

against the applicants. I say that after the completion of investigation the respondent No. 1 was pleased to file chargesheet against the applicants before the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, 53rd

Bhagyawant Punde

3/6 14-APL-537-2021.doc

Court Mulund, Mumbai and it is numbered as CC. No. 72/PW/2021.

2. I say that the dispute between myself, and the applicants has been resolved and has been amicably settled between both the parties. I say that applicants are related to me and are my family members. I say that Applicant no. 1 is my real brother and applicant no. 2 is my nephew. I say that I have no grievance against the applicants.

3. I say that I do not want to pursue with the criminal case bearing No. 72/PW/2021 pending before the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, 53rd Court, Mulund, Mumbai against the applicants, in view of the settlement.

4. I say that I have no objection for quashing of the criminal case bearing C.C. No. 72PW/2021 arising out of Cr no. 537/2020 for offence u/s. 323, 324, 504, 506, 34 of IPC Act registered against the applicants and I consent for quashing of the same.

5. I say that I am making this Affidavit without any force or coercion or pressure and I am making the same on my own free will and accord and satisfaction.

6. Respondent No. 3 has also filed affidavit before this

Court. Paragraphs 1 to 6 of the said affidavit read as under:-

1. I say that on 26/10/2020, my father i.e. Respondent no. 2 had lodged an F.I.R. baring Cr No. 537/2020 for offence u/s. 323, 324, 504, 506, 34 of IPC registered with Respondent No. 1 against the applicants. I say that after the completion of investigation the respondent No. 1 was pleased to file chargesheet against the applicants before the Ld.

Bhagyawant Punde

4/6 14-APL-537-2021.doc

Metropolitan Magistrate, 53rd Court Mulund, Mumbai and it is numbered as CC. No. 72/PW/2021.

2. I say that at the time of incident, applicant no. 2 gave blow to my face, neck and waist with iron stick. I say that I am the brother of applicant no. 2. I say that applicants are related to me and are my family members. I say that Applicant no. 1 is my Uncle and Applicant no. 2 is my cousin brother.

3. I say that dispute between myself, and the applicants has been resolved and has been amicably settled between both the parties. I say that I have no grievance against the applicants.

4. I say that I do not want to pursue with the criminal case bearing No. 72/PW/2021 pending before the Ld.

Metropolitan Magistrate, 53rd Court, Mulund, Mumbai against the applicants.

5. I say that I have no objection for quashing of the criminal case bearing C.C. No. 72/PW/2021 arising out of Cr no.

537/2020 for offence u/s. 323, 324,504, 506, 34 of IPC Act registered against the applicants and I consent for quashing of the same.

6. I say that I am making this Affidavit without any force or coercion or pressure and I am making the same on my own free will and accord and satisfaction.

7. Since the parties have amicably settled the dispute and

Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have filed affidavit thereby giving consent

for quashing the impugned FIR and chargesheet, no fruitful purpose

will be served by continuing the proceedings bearing CC. No.

72/PW/2021 arising out of C.R. No. 537 of 2020 registered at

Bhagyawant Punde

5/6 14-APL-537-2021.doc

Bhandup Police Station, Mumbai for offences under section 323,

324, 504, 506, 34 of I.P.C., pending before the LD. Metropolitan

Magistrate 53rd Court, Mulund, Mumbai.

8. 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

offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil,

partnership or such like transactions or the offence 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

1 2012 (10) SCC 303

Bhagyawant Punde

6/6 14-APL-537-2021.doc

the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any

court.

9. In view of discussion in foregoing paragraphs, to secure

the ends of justice and prevent the abuse of the process of the

Court, the application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the

application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), which is

reproduced hereinabove in para 2.

10. Rule is made absolute to above extent. The application

stands disposed of.

11. Parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order.

( N. J. JAMADAR, J.) (S. S. SHINDE, J.)

Bhagyawant Punde