Roshan Surendra Uchil vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2023 Latest Caselaw 6368 Bom

bipin prithiani
                                             1
                                                                        5-wp-3541.16.doc

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

              CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3541 OF 2016

Roshan Surendra Uchil                                      ...        Petitioner
      Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                            ...        Respondents
                              ******
Ms. Kranti S. S. Anand a/w Akansha Kadam for the Petitioner.
Ms. M. H. Mhatre, APP for the Respondent No.1-State.
None for the Respondent No.2.
                              ******
                                         CORAM: NITIN W. SAMBRE AND
                                                R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

                                         DATE    : 5th JULY, 2023

P.C. :-

.         On 20 February 2017, this Court has granted rule in the matter

and continued the interim relief, as a sequel of which the petitioner is not charge-sheeted.

2. The respondent thereafter was granted time by way of last chance on 8 June 2023 to complete the pleadings and prepare the matter for argument on behalf of respondent no.2.

3. Today, when the matter is called out, none appeared for the respondent no.2-complainant.

4. On 18 October 2016, this Court prima facie noticed that there was no compliance of sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 154 of the

bipin prithiani

5-wp-3541.16.doc

Cr.P.C. on the part of the respondent no.2-complainant and stayed the filing of charge-sheet. The said interim relief thereafter continued till this date.

5. We have perused the very complaint to which the challenge is raised in the present petition so also the order dated 8 August 2014 passed on the said complaint wherein the complaint was sent for investigation to the Police Station Officer in exercise of powers under Section 156(3).

6. Perusal of the said order depicts that the Magistrate before passing the said order has not applied his mind as to whether the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (3) of Section 154 of the Cr.P.C. are complied with and whether the pleadings in the complaint discloses a cognizable offence. The Magistrate has passed a stereo type order stating that there are allegations of fraud and hence the complaint needs to be sent for investigation.

7. The aforesaid observations of the Magistrate proves offence to the very judgment of Apex Court in the matter of Mrs. Priyanka Srivastava & Anr. v/s. State of U.P. & Ors., reported in (2015) 6 SCC 287 and judgment of this Court in the matter of Mr. Panchabhai Popotbhai Butani & Ors. v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors., reported in 2009 SCC OnLine Bom 1983.

8. In view of above, we were about to dispose of the present proceedings, however, we deem it appropriate to grant one more

bipin prithiani

5-wp-3541.16.doc

chance to the counsel for respondent no.2 as already rule is granted in the matter.

9. Accordingly, stand over to 7 July 2023 (part heard matter).

  [R. N. LADDHA, J.]                            [NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]
                  Digitally signed by
 BIPIN            BIPIN
                  DHARMENDER
 DHARMENDER       PRITHIANI
 PRITHIANI        Date: 2023.07.07
                  10:16:44 +0530