Bombay High Court
Subhash Shivba Jadhav vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Risod Tah. ... on 13 June, 2023
Bench: Vinay Joshi, Valmiki Sa Menezes
1 2-J-APL-758-22.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 758 OF 2022
APPLICANT: Subhash Shivba Jadhav,
Aged about : 75 years,
Occupation - Agriculturist,
R/o Gobhani, Tah. Risod,
District - Washim.
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Risod, Tah. Risod,
District Washim.
2. Shubham @ Abhishekh Jadhav,
Aged about 22 years,
R/o Sadashiv Nagar, Risod,
Tah. Risod, District - Washim.
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 759 OF 2022
APPLICANT: Sau. Kusum w/o Subhash Jadhav,
Aged about 48 years,
Occupation - Housewife,
R/o Gobhani, Tah. Risod,
District - Washim - 444504.
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Risod, Tah. Risod,
District Washim.
2. Shubham @ Abhishekh s/o
Prabhakar Jadhav,
Aged about 22 years,
R/o Sadashiv Nagar, Risod,
Tah. Risod, District - Washim.
::: Uploaded on - 15/06/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 15/06/2023 12:28:36 :::
2 2-J-APL-758-22.doc
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 760 OF 2022
APPLICANT: Ganesh s/o Subhash Jadhav,
Aged about 29 years,
Occupation - Education
R/o Gobhani, Tah. Risod,
District - Washim.
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Risod, Tah. Risod,
District Washim.
2. Shubham @ Abhishekh s/o
Prabhakar Jadhav,
Aged about 22 years,
R/o Sadashiv Nagar, Risod,
Tah. Risod, District - Washim.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. D. I. Charlewar, Advocate (Appointed) for applicants.
Shri V. A. Thakare, A. P. P. for respondent No.1.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:- VINAY JOSHI AND
VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.
DATED : 13/06/2023.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER VINAY JOSHI, J.) :
1. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned
counsel appearing for the parties.
2. All these applications are arising out of Crime
No.597/2021 registered with Police Station Risod, Dist. Washim
for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 326 and 506 r/w
Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3 2-J-APL-758-22.doc
3. Three accused of the crime namely; Subhash Shivba
Jadhav, Sau. Kusum w/o Subhash Jadhav and Ganesh s/o Subhash
Jadhav have applied for quashing on account of false implication
and inadequacy of material. It is argued that the existing FIR is
outcome of earlier FIR lodged by informant party on 26/07/2021.
According to the applicants, in fact, in the concerned incident,
they sustained injuries for which injury reports have been
produced. According to the applicants, at the behest of informant
party, they have been falsely implicated. The State resisted by
submitting that these are two counter cases wherein both sides got
injured, unless entire material comes before the Trial Court, it
cannot be ascertained as to who was aggressor. Learned APP took
us through the statement of injured Shubham Jadhav as well as
another injured Kamal Jadhav to contend that there are specific
allegations against the applicants.
4. With the assistance of both sides, we have gone through
the statements. On careful examination, we see that the informant
Subham @ Abhishekh s/o Prabhakar Jadhav has specifically stated
about the presence of three applicants on the spot with arms. He
stated that on 25/07/2021 at around 11.30 a.m. to 12.00 noon,
they arrived in the agricultural land and assaulted them by means
of wooden stick, causing them bleeding injury. Similar is the
4 2-J-APL-758-22.doc
statement of another witness who equally stated about his specific
role and conduct. We have gone through the injury report which
discloses that Subham Jadhav sustained incised wound while
Kamal Jadhav sustained incised wound with a fracture. Thus, at
the threshold, it cannot be said that it is a case of false implication.
Though the FIR has been belatedly lodged, it emerges that out of
the same incident, two FIRs have been lodged. Particularly soon
after the occurrence, both injured were admitted in the hospital
and thus, it is matter of appreciation in trial. However, we are of
the considered view that prima facie material exists against the
applicants and therefore, we are not inclined to exercise our
inherent jurisdiction. In view of that, all these applications stand
dismissed.
5. The fees of appointed counsel be quantified, as per the
Rules.
6. The applications pending, if any, stand disposed of
accordingly.
[VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J.] [VINAY JOSHI, J.]
Choulwar
