Dinesh Dashrath Ranekar vs State Of Mah. Thr. Officer ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 4913 Bom

                                             1                               918-apl-693-22j.odt



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

              CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 693 OF 2022

Mr. Dinesh Dashrath Ranekar,
Aged- 51 years, Occupation- Private Job,
R/o. Plot No. 65, Mahatma Gandhi Nagar,
Hudkeshwar, Nagpur, Tahsil & District Nagpur
(Maharashtra State).                                                       . . . APPLICANT

                       ...V E R S U S..

1. State of Maharashtra through
   Officer In-charge, Hudkeshwar Police
   Station, Hudkeshwar, Nagpur,
   Tahsil & District- Nagpur
  (Maharashtra State)

2. Mr. Nishikant Shivaji Mehatre,
   Aged- 58 years, Occupation- Retired,
   R/o. Plot No. 46, Rajanigandha,
   Ayodhya Nagar, Nagpur,
   Tahsil & District- Nagpur
   (Maharashtra State)

3. Mrs. Smita W/o. Nishikant Mehatre,
   Aged-56 years, Occupation- Retired,
   R/o. Plot No. 46, Rajanigandha,
   Ayodhya Nagar, Nagpur,
   Tahsil & District- Nagpur
   (Maharashtra State)                                             . . NON-APPLICANTS


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Ayushi H. Dangre, Advocate for applicant.
Shri S. S. Doifode, APP for non-applicant no. 1/State.
Shri Sandip Singh, Advocate for non-applicant nos. 2 and 3.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CORAM :- V. M. DESHPANDE AND
                          AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED :- 06.05.2022 2 918-apl-693-22j.odt

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) :-

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of the parties.

3. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, the applicant is challenging registration of the

First Information Report (FIR) No. 68/2010, dated 10.05.2010 for the

offence punishable under Sections 324, 294, 506, 323 of the Indian

Penal Code and charge-sheet No. 103/2010, dated 05.09.2010 and

consequent Regular Criminal Case No. 2650/2010 pending before the

16th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First

Class, Corporation Court No. 2, Nagpur.

4. The FIR came to be registered against the applicant with

accusation that the applicant assaulted the non-applicant no. 2 with

paper weight. The Investigating Agency completed the investigation

and filed charge-sheet against the applicant. During the pendency of

the proceedings, the applicant and the non-applicant nos. 2 and 3

amicably resolved their dispute as they are relatives. The non-

applicant nos. 2 and 3 are present in the Court and stated that they

have no objection in quashing the proceedings against the applicant. In 3 918-apl-693-22j.odt

addition to that, the non-applicant nos. 2 and 3 also filed their affidavit

stating that they have no objection if the proceedings are quashed

against the applicant.

5. We have carefully considered the allegations in the FIR

alongwith material in the form of charge-sheet. We are satisfied that

ingredients of the offence alleged against the applicant, even if

allegations are taken at face value, are not fulfilled. The Hon'ble Apex

Court in the case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC

466] makes it clear that Court cannot decline to quash criminal case in

which FIR incorporates a particular provision, which is a serious

offence or an offence against the society. The Court shall make all

endeavor whether the FIR indeed discloses the ingredient of such

offence and Court can accept the settlement and quash the FIR if the

Court is of the opinion that such offence is unnecessarily incorporated

in the FIR.

6. In view of the amicable settlement and resolution of

dispute between the parties, there is no impediment in quashing of the

FIR against the applicant. We are satisfied that the applicant has made

out a case for quashment of the proceedings. We, therefore, pass the

following order:-

                                                           4                       918-apl-693-22j.odt



                         i)          The application is allowed.

                         ii)         Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (i), which

                         reads as under :-

"(i) Quash (A) First Information Report No. 68/2010, dated 10/05/2010 for the offence punishable under Section 324, 294, 506, 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered by non-applicant No. 1 police authority (Annx-1) and (B) Charge Sheet No. 103/2010, dated 05/09/2010 for the offence punishable under Section 324, 294, 506, 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 submitted by non-applicant No. 1 police authority (Annx-2) and (C) Proceeding viz. Regular Criminal Case No. 2650/2010, (State Vs. Dinesh) pending before the Hon'ble 16 th Joint Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Corporation Court No. 2, Nagpur (Annx-2), in view of aforesaid facts and in the interest of justice;"

(AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) (V. M. DESHPANDE, J.)

RR Jaiswal

Digitally signed by JAISWAL JAISWAL RAJNESH RAMESH RAJNESH Date:

RAMESH    2022.05.06
          13:14:37
          +0530