Bombay High Court
Atmaram Satywan Tidke vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 15 March, 2022
Bench: V.K. Jadhav, Sandipkumar Chandrabhan More
(1) cria814.22
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
948 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.814 OF 2022
ATMARAM SATYWAN TIDKE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
Mr.P.D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr.S.D. Ghayal, APP for the respondent/State.
CORAM : V.K. JADHAV &
SANDIPKUMAR C.MORE,JJ.
DATED : 15.03.2022
PC :-
01. We have heard learned Counsel for the applicant
at length. The applicant is seeking quashing of FIR
bearing Crime No.6 of 2022, registered with Ghansawangi
Police Station, Dist. Jalna for the offences punishable
under sections 354, 354(A), 506 of the Indian Penal Code
and also seeking quashing of proceedings bearing RCC
No.15 of 2022.
02. On the basis of complaint lodged by respondent
No.2, aforesaid crime came to be registered. It has been
alleged in the complaint that while respondent No.2 -
::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2022 01:35:45 :::
(2) cria814.22
informant returned to house from field, present applicant
caught hold of her from backside and pressed her breasts
by both hands.
03. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that
on the basis of complaint lodged by the wife of the
applicant, Crime No.5 of 2022 for the offence punishable
under sections 294, 341, 509 and 504 of the Indian Penal
Code came to be registered against the husband of
respondent No.2. Learned Counsel for the applicant
submits that in order to counterblast, present complaint
came to be lodged with oblique motive.
04. We have carefully gone through the contents of
the present FIR, wherein respondent No.2 - informant has
made direct allegations against the applicant. It has
been alleged in the complaint that at a public place, on
a way, the applicant not only caught hold of respondent
No.2 - informant from backside but also pressed her
breasts.
::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2022 01:35:45 :::
(3) cria814.22
05. Though the learned Counsel for the applicant has
vehemently submitted about malafides in filing of the
complaint, in the case of State of Harayana Vs. Bhajanlal
and Ors.,1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335, in para No.111 of the
judgment, the Supreme Court has referred the view
expressed in case a of Sheonandan Paswan Vs. State of
Bihar and Ors., reported in 1987 Cr.L.J.793, wherein it
is held that it is proposition of law that criminal
prosecution, if otherwise justifiable and based upon
adequate evidence, does not become vitiate on account of
malafides or political vendetta of first informant or the
complainant.
06. It is well settled that the powers of quashing
of criminal proceedings are required to be exercised very
sparingly that too in the rarest case. The Court should
not embark upon any enquiry as to the genuineness as to
the allegations made in the FIR. It is for the Trial
Court to consider both the cases on its own merits.
::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2022 01:35:45 :::
(4) cria814.22
However, we cannot conduct a mini trial here and give a
clean-chit to the applicant as claimed.
07. In a case of State of Odisha Vs. Pratima
Mohanty etc in Criminal appeal Nos.1455-1456 of 2021
decided on 11.12.2021, in para 6.2 of the judgment, the
Supreme Court has made following observations :-
6.2 It is trite that the power of quashing should be
exercised sparingly and with circumspection and in
rare cases. As per settled proposition of law while
examining an FIR/complaint quashing of which is
sought, the court cannot embark upon any enquiry as
to the reliability or genuineness of allegations
made in the FIR/complaint. Quashing of a
complaint/FIR should be an exception rather than any
ordinary rule. Normally the criminal proceedings
should not be quashed in exercise of powers under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. when after a thorough
investigation the charge-sheet has been filed. At
the stage of discharge and/or considering the
application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the courts are
not required to go into the merits of the
allegations and/or evidence in detail as if
conducting the mini-trial. As held by this Court the
powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is very wide, but
::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2022 01:35:45 :::
(5) cria814.22
conferment of wide power requires the court to be
more cautious. It casts an onerous and more diligent
duty on the Court."
08. Though the learned Counsel for the applicant has
vehemently submitted before us that the applicant is 70
years of age, however, at the same time we cannot ignore
that respondent No.2-informant is about 50 years of age.
In view of the same, we are not inclined to entertain
this criminal application. Hence, following order :-
O R D E R
(i) The Criminal Application is hereby dismissed.
[SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE,J.] [V.K. JADHAV,J.]
snk/2022/MAR22/cria814.22
