Bombay High Court
Pawan Bhimrao Mhaiskar vs State Of Mah. Thr. Its Police ... on 17 August, 2022
Bench: Manish Pitale, G. A. Sanap
1 52 apl1002.22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1002 OF 2022
PAWAN BHIMRAO MHAISKAR
VERSUS
STATE OF MAH., THRU. P.S.O., P.S., KAMTHI, DIST. NAGPUR AND ANOTHER
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Rajesh V. Manmode, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. S. M. Ghodeswar, A. P. P. for the non-applicant no.1
Ms. Shena V. Motghare, Advocate for non-applicant no.2.
CORAM : MANISH PITALE and G. A. SANAP, JJ.
DATE : AUGUST 17, 2022.
1. In this application, while issuing notice on
02.08.2022 and made returnable today, this Court had
recorded the fact that the parties have already settled their
dispute, which arose out of a motor vehicle accident. The
terms of settlement filed before the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal were annexed with the application and this Court
had taken note of the same.
2. Today, when the application is called out for hearing,
learned counsel Ms. Sneha Motghare, submits that she has
instructions to appear on behalf of non-applicant no.2
(original informant-complainant). She submits that
Vakalatnama on behalf of said non-applicant shall be filled
in the Registry. Reply-cum-affidavit of non-applicant no.2
is handed over to this Court. The same is taken on record,
2 52 apl1002.22.odt
which is marked as "Exhibit-X" for the purposes of
identification. In the said reply-cum-affidavit, it is
confirmed that the said non-applicant has indeed received
the amount of Rs. Three lakhs in terms of the settlement,
executed between the parties before the Tribunal. In
pursuance of acceptance of the said amount, the non-
applicant no.2 has stated on affidavit that he does not wish
to proceed with the matter and that he has no objection for
prayer in the present application being granted.
3. We are of the opinion that since the offences alleged
against the applicant arose out of the motor vehicle accident
and the parties have indeed settled their dispute and that
the applicant has paid the agreed amount to the non-
applicant no.2, there ought not to be any impediment in
quashing of the first information report and the charge-
sheet. This is in tune with the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gyan Singh .vs. State of Punjab
and others, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and series of
judgments rendered thereafter by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court.
4. In view of above, the application is allowed in terms
of prayer clause (a), which reads as follows :
"a. Invoke power under Section 482 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 and thereby quash SCC No.
3 52 apl1002.22.odt
541/2018 for offences punishable under Sections 279, 337
and 338 of IPC and Section 184 of the Motor Vehicle Act,
1988, pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate,
First Class, Kamthi (Annexure no.1)"
The application stands disposed of.
JUDGE JUDGE
Diwale
Digitally signed byPARAG
PRABHAKARRAO DIWALE
Signing Date:18.08.2022
19:08
