Bombay High Court
Sunil S/O Sagarmal Agrawal vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps ... on 24 March, 2023
Bench: Vinay Joshi, Bharat Pandurang Deshpande
Judgment apl1644.22
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION [APL] No. 1644/2022.
Sunil s/o Sagarmal Agrawal,
Aged about 62 years, Occupation -
Business, resident of 1334, Deshpande
Layout [East], Wardhaman Nagar,
Nagpur 440008. ... APPLICANT.
VERSUS
1.State of Maharashtra,
through Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Ganeshpeth,
Nagpur.
2.Piyush s/o Vinod Fattepuriya,
resident of 142, Farm Land,
Flat No.303, Sumatinath Apartment,
Ramdaspeth, Nagpur. ... NON-APPLICANTS.
---------------------------------
Mr. J.M. Gandhi, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. N.R.Rode, A.P.P. for Non-applicant No.1/State.
Mr.H.N. Verma, Advocate for Non-applicant No.2.
----------------------------------
Rgd.
::: Uploaded on - 28/03/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 28/03/2023 23:26:44 :::
Judgment apl1644.22
2
CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND
BHARAT P. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : MARCH 24, 2023.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER VINAY JOSHI, J.) :
Considering the controversy involved in the matter and by
consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, Criminal
Application is taken up for final disposal.
Admit.
2. This is an application seeking to quash the first
information report bearing Crime No.371/2022 registered with
Ganeshpeth Police Station, Nagpur for the offence punishable under
Section 381 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, to the
extent of the applicant - Sunil Agrawal.
3. The non-applicant no.2 was indulging into sale of papers
in large scale. He came across that a theft of paper bundles occurred
at his godown. It was revealed that co-accused Vishnu, who is an
Rgd.
Judgment apl1644.22
auto-driver has stolen paper bundles and sold it to the applicant,
who is a trader.
4. The applicant came before us by contending that he is
merely a trader, has purchased the paper bundles from open market.
He was not aware that it was a stolen property. No sooner he came
across that the goods were owned by the informant, he has returned
all the goods to him. The applicant stated that since the informant
has received his goods, the later has no grievance against him.
5. In pursuance to the notice issued by this Court, the
informant has appeared before us and filed an affidavit affirming the
fact that he has received the goods and do not wish to prosecute
against the applicant. Today the informant is present before the
Court and has accepted about the settlement and his unwilling to
prosecute against the applicant.
6. The offence was about a theft by a servant or clerk. The
particular allegations are against the co-accused, an auto-rickshaw
Rgd.
Judgment apl1644.22
driver, who has stolen the property. The police have not invoked
the provisions of Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code against the
applicant. Apart from merits, the matter is settled in between the
applicant and non-applicant no.2. The offence cannot be termed as
heinous or antisocial. Having regard to the peculiar facts, we are
inclined to exercise our inherent jurisdiction, as continuation of trial
would be an exercise in futility.
7. In view of above, Criminal Application is allowed and
disposed of. The first information report bearing Crime
No.371/2022 registered with Ganeshpeth Police Station, Nagpur for
the offence punishable under Section 381 read with Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code, is hereby quashed and set aside to the extent
of applicant - Sunil Sagarmal Agrawal only.
JUDGE JUDGE
Rgd.
