The High Court quashed offences under IPC sections 143, 144, 145, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, and 506 (II) in two mutual criminal cases filed regarding a religious dispute, due to a post-filing settlement recorded via consent terms.
Rule made absolute in both applications to quash the registered offences under the IPC.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
appln485-471
1
ssp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.485 OF 2012
Mr.Nasir Khan & Ors....Applicants
vs.
Mr.Feroz Mapkhan Shah & Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.471 OF 2012
Mr.Feroz Mapkhan & Ors....Applicants
vs.
Mr.Nasir Khan Mushtaq Khan & Anr....Respondents
Ms Prabha Badadare i/b Mr.Meghashyam Kocharekar for
the applicants in Application no.485/2012 and for
the respondent no.1 in application no.471/2012
Mr.Rahul R. Singh for the applicants in application
no.471/2012 and for respondent no.1 in application
no.485/2012
Mr.K.V.Saste, A.P.P for State
CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
S.S.SHINDE, JJ.
DATE : DECEMBER 6,2012
P.C.:
.Not on board. Taken on board. Rule.
1The learned counsel representing the first
respondent in these two applications waive service.
Learned A.P.P waives service for second respondent.
2Criminal application no.485/2012 has been filed
for quashing the registration of offences punishable
under sections 143,144,145,148,149,323, 324, 506
appln485-471
2
(II) of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred
to as IPC) and Criminal application no.471/2012 is
filed praying for quashing the offences, registered
at the instance of the first respondent therein,
punishable under sections 323, 324, 325, 506(II),
143, 144, 145, 148, 149 of the IPC. The learned
counsel for the applicants and the first respondent
in these applications state that subsequently the
parties have arrived at settlement. The settlement
has been incorporated in the consent terms. The
consent terms signed on 22nd March 2012 are annexed
to both the applications in which agreement is
recorded that the parties have agreed to quash the
proceedings initiated on the basis of the offences
registered.
3We have perused the complaints. Both the
reports relate to the same incident of 23rd December
2009. Perusal of the F.I.Rs show that there was a
dispute over a religious function between the two
groups. Thus, the complaints on the basis of which
offences are filed are in the nature of cross
complaints. In the consent terms, it is set out
that the parties agree that the cases were filed as
a result of a misunderstanding. The settlement was
of all proceedings including the proceedings before
the Charity Commissioner.
4From the consent terms, it does appear that
there is settlement between the two groups. It is
apparent that due to dispute, cross complaints have
been registered. Looking to the facts of the case,
3 appln485-471
we are of the view that sections 324 and 325 may not
have any application. In view of the consent terms
and peculiar nature of the case, power under section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 will
have to be exercised.
5 Accordingly, we pass the following order :.Rule in both applications is made absolute in
terms of prayer clause (a).
(S.S.SHINDE,J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Criminal Procedure Code powers should be exercised to quash proceedings over which cross complaints were filed on the same incident.
Whether settlement terms between parties affect the application of IPC sections 324 and 325.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Nasir Khan
Feroz Mapkhan Shah
Feroz Mapkhan
Nasir Khan Mushtaq Khan
A.S.Oka
S.S.Shinde
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court