Sudhir Daulatchand Kothari vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3869 Bom

                                                            10 apl 658.15.jud.odt
                                               1/3



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

             CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.658 OF 2015



  1.              Sudhir Daulatchand Kothari,
                  Aged about 63 years, Occ. Advocate,
                  R/o. Jagannath Ward, Hinganghat                 ....APPLICANT


                                      // VERSUS //


  1.              The State of Maharashtra,
                  Through P.S.O. Hinganghat,
                  District Wardha

  2.              Shri Pralay S/o Bhauraoji Telang,
                  Aged about 40 years,
                  Occupation Business,
                  R/o. Ramnagar Ward,
                  Hinganghat, District Wardha            .... NON-APPLICANTS

  Shri R. Khemuka, Advocate h/f Shri Apurv De, Advocate for the applicant.
  Shri S.P. Deshpande, APP for the non-applicant No.1/State.
  Shri Sangram Vikas Sirpurkar, Advocate for the non-applicant No.2.
  ___________________________________________________________________

                               CORAM : Z. A. HAQ AND
                                          AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATE : 02.03.2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT: [PER: AMIT B. BORKAR, J.]

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

Criminal Procedure, the applicant has challenged registration of

the First Information Report bearing Crime No.3100/2015

10 apl 658.15.jud.odt

registered with the non-applicant No.1-Police Station for the

offence punishable under Section 3(1)(VII)(X) of the Scheduled

Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989 and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The First Information Report came to be lodged

against the applicant with the accusations that the applicant

hurled abuses in the name of cast against the non-applicant

No.2. It is also alleged that the applicant threatened the non-

applicant No.2 that he will kill the non-applicant No.2. The

applicant has challenged the registration of the First Information

Report by filing present application. This Court on

14th September 2015 issued notice and on 11 th February 2016

admitted present application.

3. During pendency of the present application, the

parties have settled their disputes amicably. The Advocate for the

non-applicant No.2 has tendered an affidavit sworn by the non-

applicant No.2 that the applicant and the non-applicant No.2

have arrived at settlement and the reports were filed against

each other due to misunderstanding.

10 apl 658.15.jud.odt

4. We have carefully considered the allegations in the

First Information Report and we are satisfied that the offence

alleged against the applicant are personal in nature. Therefore,

we are satisfied that there is no impediment in quashing of the

First Information Report against the applicant.

5. We therefore, pass the following order:-

(i) The First Information Report bearing Crime

No.3100/2015 for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)

(VII)(X) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Section 506 of the

Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside.

Rule is made absolute in above terms.

CRIMINAL (APPP) NO. 1055 OF 2017

In view of disposal of main Application, this Criminal

application does not survive and same is disposed of.

                     JUDGE                                  JUDGE
  manisha