Bombay High Court
Amit S/O Devidas Kadwe vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso Ps ... on 8 September, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande, Amit B. Borkar
1 Cri.APL No.44.2021-J.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 44 OF 2021
Amit S/o. Devidas Kadwe,
Aged about 27 years,
Occupation : Professional Consultant,
R/o. Kannamwar Nagar, Arvi,
Tq. Arvi, Dist. Wardha. ......APPLICANT
... VERSUS ...
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station Rajapeth, Amravati,
Tq. & Dist. Amravati.
2. Anshum D/o. Ramesh Vesankar,
Aged about 31 years,
Occ. - Service,
R/o. In the house of Dhanraj Gupta
"Pushp", Rajapeth, Amravati,
Tq. & Dist. Amravati.
Permanent Address :-
C/o. Ramesh Madhavrao Vesankar,
Flat No. 401, Madhuvishwa Apartment,
Trimurti Nagar, Rana Pratap Nagar, Bhamti
Parsodi, Near NIT Garden, Nagpur,
Tq. & Dist. Nagpur - 440022. .....NON-APPLICANTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Anil Mardikar, Sr. Adv. a/b Shri S. S. Dhengale, Adv. for the Applicant.
Shri S. M. Ghodeswar, Additional Public Prosecutor for the Non-applicant
No.1.
Shri S. K. Bhoyar, Advocate for the Non-applicant No.2.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATE : 08.09.2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)
1. Heard.
2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
3. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, the applicant is challenging registration of the
First Information Report bearing No.795/2020 dated 06.12.2020
registered with the non-applicant No.1 - Police Station for the
offences punishable under Sections 354, 354-D, 506 and 504 of
the Indian Penal Code.
4. The First Information Report came to be registered
against the applicant with the accusations that the non-applicant
No.2 was working at M.I.D.C., Amravati as Assistant Architect.
The non-applicant No.2 came in contact with the applicant for the
purpose of office work and thereafter both were acquainted with
each other. It is alleged that the applicant was sending messages
frequently to the non-applicant No.2 and requested her to talk
with him. It is alleged that on 06.12.2020 the present applicant
visited the house of the non-applicant No.2 and tried to establish
close intimacy with the non-applicant No.2 and requested her to
talk with him and not to avoid him by stating that the applicant
wants to marry the non-applicant No.2. The applicant also
threatened the non-applicant No.2 that, if she refuses to talk with
him, he will commit suicide. The non-applicant No.2 therefore,
filed the First Information Report against the applicant.
5. The applicant has therefore, challenged registration of
the First Information Report by way of present application. This
Court on 13.01.2021 issued notice to the non-applicants. The
non-applicant No.1 has filed reply stating that there is sufficient
material on record to implicate the applicant for the offences
alleged against him.
6. During the pendency of the present application, the
matter was referred to mediation. The learned Mediator has
submitted his report in Mediation Case No.94/2021. The learned
Mediator has stated in his report that the non-applicant No.2 does
not want to prosecute the First Information Report registered
against the applicant and therefore, the non-applicant No.2 has
prayed before this Court to quash the First Information Report
against the applicant.
7. We have carefully considered the allegations in the First
Information Report. Though the offences alleged against the
applicant are serious in nature, but having carefully gone through
the allegation in the First Information Report, the material
produced by the applicant and the reply filed by the non-applicant
No.1, we are satisfied that essential ingredients of the offences
alleged against the applicant are not fulfilled, even if, the
allegations are taken on their face value.
8. The decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab & anr. reported in
(2014) AIR SCW 2065, makes it clear that the Court cannot
declare to quash the First Information Report merely because the
First Information Report incorporates a particular provision which
is a serious offence or offence against society. The Court has to
make an endeavour to find out whether the information in the
First Information Report indeed discloses the ingredients of such
offence and the Court can accept the settlement and quash the
report/charge-sheet only after the Court is of the opinion that
such an offence is unnecessarily incorporated in the First
Information Report/charge-sheet.
9. From the perusal of the First Information Report and the
material produced in the Court, we are satisfied that
the ingredients of the offence under Sections 354, 354-D, 506 and
504 of the Indian Penal Code are not fulfilled. Since the applicant
and the non-applicant No.2 have mutually resolved their dispute,
chances of conviction are bleak.
10. In view of the report of the Mediator recording consent
of the non-applicant No.2 to quash the report against the
applicant, there is no impediment for quashing the First
Information Report against the applicant.
11. We therefore, pass following order :
The First Information Report bearing No.795/2020
dated 06.12.2020 registered with the non-applicant No.1 - Police
Station for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 354-D,
506 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside.
12. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Pending
application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
JUDGE JUDGE
RGurnule
