Bombay High Court
Nitin Jayram Parab vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 7 June, 2023
Bench: Nitin W. Sambre, Sharmila U. Deshmukh
2023:BHC-AS:15253-DB
sg 1 46.wp2817-22.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2817 OF 2022
Nitin Jayram Parab ..... Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..... Respondents
.....
Mr. Sanjeev Sawant, a/w. Mr. B.K. Barve, i/b. B.K. Barve & Co.,
for the Petitioner.
Mr. J.P. Yagnik, APP, for Respondent State.
Mr. Padmakar Gorad, i/b. S.G. Legal & Associates, for Respondent
No.2.
.....
CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE &
SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE : 7 JUNE 2023.
Oral Judgment (Per Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.) :
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of
parties. Learned APP waives for the Respondent State. Learned
Counsel for Respondent No.2 waives for the Respondent No.2.
2. The Petitioner has approached this Court seeking to
quash and set aside the FIR bearing C.R. No.384 of 2019,
registered with Dattawadi Police Station, Dattawadi Pune City,
Dist. Pune, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406,
409, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Heard Mr. Sanjeev Sawant, learned Counsel for the
sg 2 46.wp2817-22.doc
Petitioner, Mr. J.P. Yagnik, learned APP, for the Respondent State
and Mr. Padmakar Gorad, learned Counsel for Respondent No.2.
4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the
Petitioner was an employee of the Respondent No.2/Complainant
which was a Non-Banking Financial Company. He would submit
that the Petitioner was an Assistant Manager at the Head Office in
Mumbai and, during his employment with the Respondent No.2
Company, the performance of the Petitioner was reviewed and
acclaimed by the Respondent No.2. He would further submit that,
with effect from 13th July 2020, he had tendered his resignation
letter, which was approved by the Respondent No.2 and the
Petitioner was relieved from his duty on 5 th August 2020. He
would further submit that the Respondent No.2, while relieving
the Petitioner has issued certificate certifying that the Petitioner
was, during his employment with the Respondent No.2, to be
honest, sincere and dedicated in his assignment. He would further
submit that the concerned FIR was lodged on 22 nd August 2019,
about which he became aware for the first time in the month of
November 2020. He would further submit that upon, enquiry
with the Respondent No.2, it was informed to him vide e-mail
dated 20th November 2020, by Senior Vice President, that the
Petitioner's name was inadvertently added by the Police at the time
of lodging of the FIR, as they had taken the names of the
employees of the Respondent No.2 and that steps will be taken to
remove his name from this matter, as he is not involved. This
confirmation e-mail is annexed at page 50 of the writ petition. He
sg 3 46.wp2817-22.doc
would further submit that, even on merits, the allegations in the
FIR is of forged and fabrication of documents for the purpose of
inducing the Respondent No.2 to disburse the housing loan and
the admitted position is that the Petitioner did not have any
authority to sanction the alleged loan nor was concerned with the
loan, which was sanctioned from Pune.
5. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2
admits the contents of the e-mail dated 20 th November 2020 and
would submit that the Respondent No.2 had no objection to the
quashing of the FIR for the Petitioner.
6. We have appreciated the submissions of the parties
and have perused the papers with the assistance of the learned
Counsel appearing for the parties. Perusal of the FIR indicates that
an allegation is made that the employees of the Respondent No.2
had forged and fabricated documents in respect of certain
properties for the purpose of inducing the Respondent No.2, which
is a Non-Banking Financial Institution to disburse the housing
loan. It is alleged that, along with the Petitioner, five other
employees, under whose supervision the loans were sanctioned and
disbursed, are responsible for the alleged offences. The undisputed
position is that the Petitioner was in no way concerned with the
sanction of the loans, as the loans were sanctioned from Pune and
the Petitioner was employed as Assistant Manager in the Head
Office at Mumbai for handling profile of Credit upto the year
2018 onwards. The offence is alleged to have been committed
sg 4 46.wp2817-22.doc
between the period 3rd October 2017 to 20th October 2017.
Perusal of the FIR indicates that there is no specific role, which has
been attributed to the present Petitioner and this fact, coupled with
the admission by the Senior Vice President of the Respondent
No.2, that the Petitioner's name was inadvertently added by the
Police at the time of lodging of the FIR, indicates that the
Petitioner has been arraigned as an accused inadvertently.
7. The present petition has been filed under the
provision of Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w 482 of the
Criminal Procedure Code and this Court, in exercise of the said
jurisdiction, has the discretion to quash and set aside the
proceeding in event the same is necessary in the interest of justice
and to prove the abuse of process in any court.
8. Considering the submissions above, we find that the
name of the Petitioner was inadvertently added and, as such, no
fruitful purpose would be achieved as the Respondent No.2 itself
have admitted this position and to compel the Petitioner to face the
trial would be a travesty of justice.
9. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. Rule
is made absolute with no orders as to costs. The FIR bearing C.R.
No. 384 of 2019, registered with Dattawadi Police Station, against
the Petitioner, is hereby quashed and set aside.
SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.
