Bombay High Court
Mahesh Madhukar Nanaware vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 21 January, 2025
Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge
2025:BHC-AS:2878-DB
ADN
1/8
WP 1367.2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1367 of 2024
Mahesh Madhukar Nanaware ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..... Respondents
Adv. Zaid Qureshi a/w. Adv. Uday Konojia (Through V.C.), Advocate
for the Petitioner.
Ms. Anuja S. Gotad, APP for the State.
CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND
RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 2nd JANUARY, 2025
PRONOUNCED ON : 21st JANUARY, 2025
JUDGMENT ( PER - RAJESH S.PATIL, J.) :
-
1. The present Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India and under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, by the original Accused person against whom offence
vide Crime No.0359 of 2022 has been registered on 08th December,
2022 at Alandi Police Station, District Pune, at the behest of
Respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 337, 279, 504,
ADN
WP 1367.2024.odt
427 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The prosecution case in the F.I.R. is that the Complaint's sister
Shravani is married to the Petitioner/Accused. The Complainant is
residing with her husband and two children. The Complainant is
working as a teacher at Riverdale Sports School for the past two years.
On 5th December, 2022, approximately 1.30 p.m., the Complainant was
returning home along with her sister Shravani on Activa Scooter. As
they reached the turn near Kel gaon, the Petitioner who was on his bike
approached them at full speed. He instructed the Complainant's sister
Shravani to stop their Active Scooter and started verbally abusing both
of them. As the Complainant did not stop her Activa Scooter, the
Petitioner obstructed their path, and kicked the Active Scooter, due to
which the scooter fell down and the Complainant along with her sister
Shravani sustained injuries. The Complainant hence filed Complaint
with the Alandi Police Station, pursuant to which the F.I.R. was
recorded for the offences punishable under Section 337, 279, 504 and
427 of the Indian Penal Code.
ADN
WP 1367.2024.odt
3. It is vehemently submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that there
were certain matrimonial disputes between the Petitioner and his wife
Shravani (who is the sister of the Complainant). No such unfortunate
act was committed by the Petitioner. In order to take revenge the
present F.I.R. has been filed by the Complainant. A bare reading of the
F.I.R. shows that there is no case made out for offences punishable
under Section 337, 279, 504 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. The
incident according to the Complainant occurred on 5 th December, 2022,
however, after much delay on 8th December, 2022 the F.I.R. was lodged
and there is no explanation for the delay caused. The Complaint
appears on the face of it totally false and, therefore, the Complaint
requires to be quashed and set aside. The whole purpose of lodging the
Complaint is to pressurize and extract monies from the Petitioner.
Perusal of the F.I.R. reveals that the acts allegedly committed by the
Petitioner would neither constitute any of the alleged offence nor same
would amount abetment of any such offence alleged. Hence, the F.I.R.
requires to be quashed and the present Petition would be allowed.
4. Per contra, the learned A.P.P. strongly opposed the
ADN
WP 1367.2024.odt
Petition and submitted that the perusal of the entire FIR and charge-
sheet would show that there is ample evidence against Petitioner to
convict them under the offence punishable under Sections 337, 279,
504 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted that once
Charge-Sheet is filed, this court should not entertain the present writ
petition. The Statement recorded of witnesses and the fact that medical
papers of the Complainant taking treatment after the incident has come
on record, further justifies that the Accused person needs to face trial
and the F.I.R. can't be quashed at this stage.
5. We have heard counsel for the both the sides and with their
assistance, we have gone through the documents on record.
6. For quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 of
Criminal Procedure Code, and under Article 226 of the Constitution,
we have to see whether the allegations in the complaint and F.I.R.
prima facie indicate that there are serious allegations against the
accused of having committed an offence.
ADN
WP 1367.2024.odt
7. The present Writ Petition has been preferred by Accused.
The Accused /Petitioner is the husband of the Complainant, who has
lodged the Complaint. The F.I.R. has been lodged by the police after a
complaint being lodged by the Complainant who is the sister of the
Petitioner's wife. The incident has occurred on 5 th December, 2022,
due to which the Complainant has lodged Complaint on 8th December,
2022. In the complaint attached to the F.I.R. it has been specifically
stated as under :
"आम्ही केळगाव गावातील ओढ्याजवळ आलो असता माझी बहीण नामे सौ श्रावणी
महे ष नन्नवरे हिहचे पती नामे महे श मधु कर नन्नवरे हे पाठीमागून त्यांचे जवळील हिहरो
होंडा बाईक घे ऊन भरधाव वे गाने आमचे गाडीचे जवळ आले व मला व बहिहणीस म्हणाले
हिक तु म्ही गाडी थांबवा मी तु मची बघतोस म्हणून मोठमोठ्याने हिशवीगाळ करू लागला परं तु
मी त्याचे कडे लक्ष न दे ता मी माझी गाडी घे ऊन पु ढे चालले व ते वड्यात त्यांनी थांचे
ताब्यातील दुचाकी मोटारसायकल वे दरकरपणे भरधाव वे गात चालवून माझे गाडीला त्याने
जोराची लाथ मारली व मला मारण्याचा प्रयत्न केला त्यामु ळे माझे गाडी हि6लप होऊन
अपघात होऊन सदर अपघातात माझे डाव्या व उजव्या पायाच्या गु डघ्यास खरचटले व
मु क्का मर लागला व उजवा पाय मु रगळला तसे च माझे बहीण नाव श्रावणी हिहचे दे खील
उजव्या गु डघ्यास व मांडीस मु क्का मार लागला व माझी गाडी दे खील र6त्यावर खाली
पडली व तीस क् रप पडू न हितचे नु कसान झाले व त्यानं तर इसम नाव महे श नन्नवरे आम्हास
हिशवीगाळ करीत ते थन ू हिनघून गे ला व त्यानं तर मी व माझी बहीण सौ श्रावणी दोघी
ग्रामीण रुग्णालय आळं दी ये थे उपचार कमी गे लो"
8. The police has recorded the statement of witness during
investigation. The statements are part of the charge-sheet which is
annexed in the present proceedings at page nos. 31, 36 to 40. Copies of
medical papers are attached at page No.44 to 49.
ADN
WP 1367.2024.odt
9. The Supreme Court in the judgments of (i) State of
Haryana & Ors. vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal & Ors., AIR 1992 SC 604, (ii)
Rajeev Kourav vs. Baisahab & others, (2020) 3 SCC 317 and (iii)
Kaptan Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2021) 9 SCC 35,
have held that exercise of powers under section 482 CrPC to quash the
proceedings is an exception and not a rule. Appreciation of evidence is
not permissible at the stage of quashing of proceedings is exercise of
powers under Section 482 CrPC.
10. In the recently reported judgment of CBI vs. Aryan Singh,
AIR 2023 SC 1987, the Supreme Court has held that while examining
the power under Section 482, the High Court should not conduct a mini
trial. Similarly in the judgment of State of Odisha vs. Pratima
Mohanty and others, (2022) 16 SCC 703, the Supreme Court has held
that once the charge-sheet is filed, the High Court should be reluctant
to quash the complaint. Paragraph no.8.2 of the judgment reads as
under :
8.2 It is trite that the power of quashing should be exercised sparingly
and with circumspection and in rare cases. As per the settled proposition of
ADN
WP 1367.2024.odt
law while examining an FIR/complaint quashing of which is sought, the
court cannot embark upon any enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness of
allegations made in the FIR/complaint. Quashing of a complaint/FIR should
be an exception rather than any ordinary rule. Normally the criminal
proceedings should not be quashed in exercise of powers under section 482
CrPC when after a thorough investigation the charge-sheet has been filed.
At the stage of discharge and/or considering the application under section
482 CrPC the courts are not required to go into the merits of the allegations
and/or evidence in detail as if conducting the mini-trial. As held by this
court the powers under section 482 CrPC are very wide, but conferment of
wide power requires the court to be more cautious. It casts all onerous and
more diligent duty on the Court.
[Emphasis supplied]
11. In the present proceedings, the charge-sheet has been
already filed on 17th May, 2023 and the police have recorded the
statement of witnesses, copies of which are enclosed with the charge-
sheet and forms part of the records of the present proceedings.
12. After considering the contents of FIR and the various
documents on record attached to the FIR, and the Charge-sheet, we are
satisfied that it constitutes the ingredients of the offences alleged.
Taking into account the law as laid down by the Supreme Court in the
judgments referred above, we find that there is no merit in the present
ADN
WP 1367.2024.odt
Writ Petition and the same deserves to be dismissed. Hence, the
following order :-
ORDER
(i) The Writ Petition stands dismissed.
(ii) Needless to state, any observations made herein are
only for the purposes of deciding the Writ Petition only
and would have no bearing on the final adjudication of
the proceedings.
[ RAJESH S. PATIL, J. ] [ RAVINDRA V. GHUGE , J. ]
