Allowed

Vikram Kishor Thakkar and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC20 Oct 2010WP/3047/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment quashed a First Information Report and related proceedings under sections 406, 420, 422, 463, and 464 of the IPC. The Court relied on Supreme Court precedents and the amicable settlement between the parties to grant the quashing application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

What did the court decide?

M.E.C.R. No. 3 of 2010 of Shirala Police Station and proceedings relating thereto are quashed.

Vikram Kishor Thakkar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

cr wp 304710.doc

¶2

RMA

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3047 OF 2010

¶5

Vikram Kishor Thakkar & Anr

¶6

.. Petitioners

¶7

Vs

¶8

The State of Maharashtra & Anr

¶9

.. Respondents

¶10

Mr. J.S. Kini i/b Mr. Suresh Dubey for the Petitioners

¶11

Mr. Deepak Thakare for Respondent No. 2

¶12

Mr. V.B. Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the State.

¶13

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J

¶14

DATE : 20th OCTOBER, 2010.

¶15

P.C.:

¶16

1Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners-original
accused, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and learned APP
for the State.

¶17

2. This petition is filed for quashing the FIR lodged by respondent no. 2 against petitioners being MECR NO. 3 of 2010 of Shirala Police Station, Sangli. It is for the offence punishable under sections 406,420,422,463 and 464 of IPC.

¶18

3. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2 states that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and the case be quashed. Respondent No. 2 filed affidavit stating

¶19

¶20

cr wp 304710.doc

¶21

therein that he has no objection if the complaint is quashed.

¶22

4.In a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of
Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 2008 SC 1969, it
isobserved as follows:

¶23

"We need to emphasize that it is perhaps advisable
that in disputes where the question involved is of
a purely personal nature, the Court should
ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even
in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive
with no possibility of a result in favour of the
prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly
over burdened as they are, cannot afford and that
the time so saved can be utilized in deciding more
effective and meaningful litigation. This is a
common sense approach to the matter based on ground
of realities and bereft of the technicalities of
the law".

¶24

5In a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State
of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Ors. reported in 1977
Cr.L.J. 1125the Supreme Court referred to Section 482 of the
Cr.P.C. and observed that in exercise of the wholesome power,
the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding if it comes
to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue

¶25

¶26

cr wp 304710.doc

¶27

would be an abuse of the process of the Court or that the
ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be
quashed. The Supreme Court further observed that this power
is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is
that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to
degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution.

¶28

6.The ratio of above decisions squarely applies to the
present case. In view of the above decisions, in my opinion,
there is no reason as to why the criminal complaint filed by
respondent no. 2 should not be quashed. Thus, in view of
above decisions and in view of the amicable settlement
between the parties, I am inclined to quash the FIR and
proceedings relating thereto.

¶29

7.In the result, M.E.C.R. No. 3 of 2010 of Shirala Police
Station and the proceedings relating thereto are quashed.

¶30

8. Application is disposed of in above terms.

¶31

[SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.]

¶32

¶33

cr wp 304710.doc

¶34

Vikram Kishor Thakkar and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikram Kishor Thakkar and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babalal Kashim Nadaf Vs the State of Maharashtra

Peer Khandayat Wali Krida Kala Sanskrutik Mandal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Anil Maruti Chavan Vs Jayashri Anil Chavan and Anr.

Deepak Madhukar Kudave and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra Vs Vaijayanti Sudhir Barangule

The State of Maharashtra Vs Husen Hambir Shaikh