Bombay High Court
Arun S/O Ramchandrarao Dhote vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 5 March, 2021
Bench: Z.A. Haq, Amit B. Borkar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 202 OF 2015
Arun s/o Ramchandrarao Dhote,
Aged about 45 years, Occ. Cultivation
and Vice President of Rajura Municipal
Council,
Resident of Rajura, Tahsil Rajura,
District Chandrapur. Applicant
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through its Police Station Officer,
Rajura Police Station,
Tahsil : Rajura, District
Chandrapur.
2. Mrs. Ranjita w/o Prakash Khadse,
aged about 27 years, Occ : Household.
R/o Soniya Nagar,
Rajura, Tahsil - Rajura,
District Chandrapur Non-applicants.
....
::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 31/08/2021 06:17:39 :::
2
Shri Rishabh Khemuka, Advocate h/f Shri SG.Joshi, Advocate for
the applicant.
Shri T.A.Mirza, APP for non-applicant no.1.
Shri Nikhil R. Tekade, Advocate for non-applicant no.2.
CORAM : Z. A. HAQ AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED : 5.3.2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) :
1. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has challenged registration
of the First Information Report No.29/2015 registered with the non-
applicant no.1 - Police Station dated 11.3.2015 for offences
punishable under Sections 452, 354, 323 of the Indian Penal Code
and under Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. The First Information Report came to be registered
against the applicant with the accusations that the applicant
assaulted husband of the non-applicant no.2 and when the non-
applicant no.2 tried to intervene, the applicant offended modesty of
by non-applicant no. 2. It is further alleged that though the
applicant was knowing that non-applicant no.2 belongs to
backward class but the applicant deliberately hurled abuses in the
::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 31/08/2021 06:17:39 :::
3
name of caste against the non-applicant no.2. The applicant has,
therefore, filed present application challenging the First Information
Report.
3. On 20.3.2015, this Court issued notice to the non-
applicants. On 3.8.2015, this Court issued Rule.
4. Pending present application, the applicant and the non-
applicant no.2 have mutually resolved their dispute. The applicant
and the non-applicant no.2 have filed application stating that since
the non-applicant no.2 alongwith her husband have arrived at
settlement, the non-applicant no.2 desires to withdraw her
complaint and pray for quashing of the First Information Report
against the applicant. The joint application is affirmed by the non-
applicant no.2 and the applicant.
5. We have carefully considered the allegations in the First
Information Report. Since the allegations in the First Information
Report are personal in nature and will have no impact on the
society, there is no impediment in quashing the First Information
Report lodged against the applicant. We, therefore, pass the
following order:
::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 31/08/2021 06:17:39 :::
4
ORDER
First Information Report No.29/2015 registered with the non-
applicant no.1 - Police Station for offences punishable under
Sections under Sections 452, 354 and 323 of the Indian Penal
Code and under Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is quashed
and set aside.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
JUDGE JUDGE
Ambulkar
