Disposed

Fulchand Raghunat Pardeshi and Ors. v. the State of Mah and Anr.

Bombay HC19 Mar 2012APPLN/821/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court at Aurangabad disposed of Criminal Application 821/2012 seeking quashment of criminal proceedings. The Court directed applicants to pay Rs. 5,000 as compensation to the State before the pending charges can be quashed on deposit.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings charged with offences under sections 323 and 452 IPC shall stand quashed upon deposit of Rs. 5,000 as cost to the State by 02/04/2012.

Fulchand Raghunat Pardeshi and Ors. Vs the… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

Cri. Appln 821/2012

¶2

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 821/2012

¶6

Office Notes,Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

Court's or Judge's orders

¶8

Mr. R.S. Shinde h/f Mr. N.L. Chaudhari, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. N.B. Patil, A.P.P. for the respondent / State. Mr. S.S. Suvarna, Advocate for the respondent No.2.

¶9

CORAM : U.D. SALVI, J.

¶10

DATED : 19^th March, 2012

¶11

Heard. Perused records.

¶12

The respondent No.2 lodged a complaint against

¶13

the present applicants alleging that the applicants / accused committed lurking house trespass and caused simple hurt to his daughter Sarita with fist blows in the afternoon of 16/01/2006. A crime was registered against the applicants / accused at Crime No. 6/2006 under section 324, 452 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 on 02/02/2006 with Azadnagar Police Station, Dhule. The investigation was carried out and the charge sheet was duly lodged in the Court of Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Dhule.

¶14

In due course, charges under section 452, 323

¶15

read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,

¶16

Cri. Appln 821/2012

¶17

were duly framed against the applicants / accused on 17/07/2008. A joint application Exhibit 100 seeking permission for compounding the said case – R.C.C. No. 534/2006 was moved before the learned Magistrate under the hand of the applicants / accused and the complainant as well as the victim. The learned Judicial Magistrate, (First Class) allowed compounding of the offence punishable under section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, but declined to compound the case under section 452 of the Indian Penal Code on the premise that the law did not conceive compounding of such offence under section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶18

Now, the parties are before this Court, seeking closure of the case, on the ground that its closure would do substantial justice between the parties as the parties are closely related to each other and the closure of the case would bring lasting peace between them.

¶19

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the closure of the case would really make a sense as revealed. However, a fact can not be ignored that the State machinery was used, till the parties came to the terms in December, 2011. The learned A.P.P. submitted that the case is one arising out of the personal disputes between the parties and certainly, there is a hope to find lasting peace in closure of the case. However, he

¶20

Cri. Appln 821/2012

¶21

¶22

submitted that State needs to be adequately compensated.

¶23

The applicants submit that they belong to one family who live on transport business run with one truck and therefore, some reasonable costs be imposed.

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant shall pay cost of Rs.5,000/- to the State and shall deposit the same in this Court on or before 02/04/2012.

¶25

On deposit of cost of Rs.5,000/- on or before 02/04/2012, Criminal proceeding – R.C.C. No.534/2006 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Dhule, shall stand quashed.

¶26

Criminal Application No. 821/2012 stands disposed off accordingly.

¶27

The amount deposited shall enure to the benefit of the State.

¶28

(U.D. SALVI, J. )

¶29

ts k/

Fulchand Raghunat Pardeshi and Ors. v. the State of Mah and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Fulchand Raghunat Pardeshi and Ors. v. the State of Mah and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suryakant Santaram Wankalas Vs Rajendra Vishwanath Bhopale and Anr.

Syed Tanveer S/O Syed Ahmadsab Vs Irshad Begum Devorcee W/O Syed Tanveer and Anr.

Syed Bashir Syed Maheboob Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pandurang Pandit Chavan and Anr. Vs the State of Mah

Dr Shaikh Ahemed Khalil Ahemed Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Raju Sudam Nagargoje and Anr. Vs the State of Mah and Anr.