Kisanrao Laxman Najanpatil And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 12363 Bom

                                          1                           916-CrAn-1839-21.odt




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                  CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1839 OF 2021


Kisanrao Laxman Najanpatil and others                       ..       Applicants

                Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another                        ..       Respondents

                                   ...
Mr. V. D. Sapkal, Senior Advocate instructed by Mr. S. R. Sapkal,
Advocate for applicants
Mr. M. M. Nerlikar, A.P.P. for respondent no.1 - State
                                   ...


                               CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH
                                                 AND
                                        NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, JJ.

DATE : 1st SEPTEMBER, 2021

PER COURT :

Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Sapkal appearing for the

applicants purports to contend that there are several procedural

breaches taking place in the present proceeding. He submits that

initially while learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Shahada, has

rejected the prayer to direct the investigation pursuant to provision

under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in

short, "Cr.P.C.") and that without making present applicants as party

respondent in criminal revision application no. 14 of 2020, an

order came to be passed directing Judicial Magistrate, First Class, to

2 916-CrAn-1839-21.odt

issue order of investigation pursuant to Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C.

and further directing the PSO, Shahada Police Station to register

crime and investigate the matter. Pursuant to aforesaid order, the

Judicial Magistrate, First Class passed order dated 11-06-2021 and

the said order was challenged in revision application before the

court of Sessions Judge, Shahada and the same came to be rejected

by order dated 04-08-2021, on the ground that the applicants have

no locus standi. The learned Senior Advocate refers to and relies on

clutch of orders passed viz; in the case of - Dhananjay s/o.

Mahadeorao Dhaktod Versus State of Maharashtra and another ,

reported in 2014 All MR (Cri) 960, dated 17-09-2017, passed by

Division Bench of this Court at Nagpur, then another case - Avinash

Trimbakrao Dhondage Versus State of Maharashtra and another ,

reported in 2016(1) Bom. C.R.(Cri) 223, dated 19th October, 2015;

the order of Allahabad High Court in the case of Atul Pandey Alias

Param Pragyan Pandey Versus State of Uttar Pradesh and another,

decided on 8th January, 2021, and Supreme Court Judgment in the

case of Manharibhai Muljibhai Kakadia and another Versus

Shaileshbhai Mohanbhai Patel and others, reported in 2012 DGLS (SC)

518 :: 2013 Cri.L.J. 144, and refers paragraph 48 of the Judgment,

emphasizing hearing to the accused, while exercising the powers

under Section 401(2) of Cr.P.C.

3 916-CrAn-1839-21.odt

2. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 15-09-2021.

3. Learned A.P.P. waives notice for respondent no. 1.

4. Till then, further proceeding pursuant to the First

Information Report is kept in abeyance.

[ NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI ]                     [ SUNIL P. DESHMUKH ]
           JUDGE                                        JUDGE




rrd