Lakhan S/O Raju Kuril And 3 Others vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Hingna ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 9657 Bom

                                               1                                31-apl-676-21j.odt



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

                CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 676 OF 2021

  1. Mr. Lakhan S/o. Raju Kuril,
     (Informant/Complainant)
     Age 27 years, Occ. Private,
     R/o. Ganesh Apartments, Flat No. 302,
     Wadi, Khadgaon Road, Nagpur.

  2. Mr. Manoj Kumar Ramball,
     (Accused No. 1)
     Age 39 years, Occ. Scrap Tire Dealer,
     R/o. Plot No. 201, Dongargaon,
     Wardha Road, Nagpur.

  3. Mr. Pramod S/o. Rajbhavan Mankar,
     (Accused No. 2)
     Age 30 years, Occ. Private Driver,
     R/o. Dongargaon, Hanuman Nagar Slum,
     Nagpur.

  4. Mr. Vishal S/o. Ganesh Khandate,
     (Accused No. 3)
     Age 25 years, Occ. Labourer,
     R/o. Plot No. 23, Beltarodi Road,
     Vivekanand Nagar, Nagpur.                                            . . . APPLICANTS

                         ...V E R S U S..

  State of Maharashtra through
  Police Station Officer,
  Police Station, Hingna,
  Nagpur City.                                                      . . . NON-APPLICANT

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Shri Sumedh R. Kadam, Advocate for applicants.
 Shri S. M. Ghodeswar, A.P.P. for non-applicant/State.
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  CORAM :- V. M. DESHPANDE AND
                           AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED :- 23.07.2021

2 31-apl-676-21j.odt

JUDGMENT (PER : AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) :-

1. Hearing was conducted through Video Conferencing and

learned counsel agreed that the audio and visual quality were proper.

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

consent of the parties.

3. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, the applicants have jointly prayed for quashing the

First Information Report (FIR) No. 138/2021, dated 28.03.2021

registered with non-applicant- Police Station for the offence punishable

under Sections 326 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The FIR came to be registered against the applicant nos. 2

to 4 with accusations that applicant nos. 2 to 4 assaulted applicant

no. 1 with iron rod and sickle. The Investigating Agency has carried

out investigation. During the pendency of the investigation, applicant

no. 1 and applicant nos. 2 to 4 have arrived at mutual settlement. We,

therefore, called upon learned A.P.P. appearing in the matter to produce

case diary. We have carefully considered the material in the form of

case diary produced by the Investigating Agency. On perusal of the

case diary, it appears that there is injury report dated 26.04.2021 on

record issued by N.K.P. Salve Institute of Medical Science and Lata

3 31-apl-676-21j.odt

Mangeshkar Hospital, Nagpur. On perusal of the injury report, it

appears that applicant no. 1 has suffered lacerated wound and incised

wound. It appears that the injuries caused to applicant no. 1 are not

serious injuries.

5. Though, it is true that offence under Section 326 of the

Indian Penal Code is a serious offence but, it would be profitable to

refer the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narinder

Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) AIR(SCW) 2065. The

decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court makes it clear that Court cannot

decline to quash criminal case in which FIR incorporates a particular

provision, which is a serious offence or an offence against the society.

The Court shall make all endeavor whether the FIR indeed discloses

the ingredient of such offence and Court can accept the settlement and

quash the FIR if the Court is of the opinion that such offence is

unnecessarily incorporated in the FIR.

6. In the facts of the present case, the offence alleged against

the applicant nos. 2 to 4 are under Section 326 of the Indian Penal

Code. On perusal of the injury certificate issued by N.K.P. Salve

Institute of Medical Science and Lata Mangeshkar Hospital, Nagpur, we

are satisfied that essential ingredients of offence under Section 326 of

the Indian Penal Code are missing. On perusal of the case diary also it

4 31-apl-676-21j.odt

is apparent that there is no material, which discloses essential

ingredients of offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code.

7. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court

in the case of Narinder Singh (supra) and in view of the fact and

circumstances of the present case, we are of the view that there is no

impediment in quashing the FIR against the applicant nos. 2 to 4.

8. We, therefore, pass the following order:-

First Information Report No. 138/2021, dated 28.03.2021

registered with non-applicant -Police Station for offence punishable

under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code

against applicant nos. 2 to 4 is quashed and set aside.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

                               JUDGE                                   JUDGE




RR Jaiswal