Allowed

Rajendra Appa Patil and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC20 Jun 2013WP/314/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal writ petition, the High Court allowed the quashing of an entire criminal proceeding pending before a Judicial Magistrate. The proceeding was filed on a private complaint involving disputes over land measurement. After a compromise was reached between the petitioners (accused) and the complainant due to a misunderstanding, the court directed the quashing of the case. Notably, the cour

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; Criminal proceeding R.C.C. No. 131 of 2012 pending before J.M.F.C., Parola, quashed and set aside.

Rajendra Appa Patil and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

Cri.W.P. No. 314/13

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 314 OF 2013

¶5

Rajendra Appa Patil and Ors. ....Petitioners.

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Maharashtra and Anr.

¶8

....Respondents.

¶9

Mrs. Rashmi S. Kulkarni, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. B.J. Sonawane, A.P.P. for State.

¶10

Mrs. Sabahat Kazi, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

¶11

CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J. DATED : 20th June, 2013.

¶12

ORDER :

¶13

The learned counsel for petitioners requested for adding prayer of quashing of the entire proceeding of R.C.C. No. 131 of 2012 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Parola, District Jalgaon. The said permission is granted. The amendment is to be effected immediately.

¶14

The proceeding is filed by some of the accused from R.C.C. No. 131 of 2012, which is pending in the Court of J.M.F.C.,

¶15

Cri.W.P. No. 314/13

¶16

¶17

Parola, District Jalgaon. The process has been issued in the private complaint by J.M.F.C. for offences under sections 166, 167, 200, 420 r/w. 34 of Indian Penal Code against the petitioners and other accused. Relief is claimed for setting aside the order of issue process and for quashing and setting aside the entire proceeding in respect of petitioners.

¶18

Today compromise pursis came to be filed by petitioners, who are accused and filed the present proceeding and the complainant. The record includes verification filed by complainant and petitioners. The complainant is identified by one advocate and the petitioners are identified by other advocate. It is mentioned in the compromise pursis that the complaint was filed due to misunderstanding. It was submitted that the provisions of sections 166 and 167 will not be applicable as against the petitioners as they are not public servant and these sections are required to be used only against public servant. It was submitted that parties got measured the land subsequent to filing of the complaint and after that, they have compromised the matter. They requested for quashing and setting aside the entire proceeding of the criminal case pending before J.M.F.C.

¶19

It appears that the complaint was filed against 11

¶20

Cri.W.P. No. 314/13

¶21

¶22

accused persons, who include accused No. 1 - Chiman Rupchand Patil and accused No. 11 - Shri. H.T. Mali, who is said to be Pension Collector. Accused No. 1 is said to be associate of accused Nos. 2 to 10. They are not before this Court. Though accused Nos. 1 and 11 are not before this Court, in view of the compromise, the entire proceeding needs to be quashed and set aside as equal treatment needs to be given to all the accused in such case. In view of this, this Court holds that entire proceedings needs to be quashed and set aside though accused Nos. 1 and 11 are not before this Court.

¶23

In the result, the petition is allowed. The proceeding of R.C.C. No. 131 of 2012, pending in the Court of J.M.F.C., Parola, in which process has been issued for offences under sections 166, 167, 200, 420 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶24

[ T. V. NALAWADE, J. ]

¶25

ssc/

Rajendra Appa Patil and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Appa Patil and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Digambar Laxman Gentyal Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Nazmoddin Jilani Gulam Shaikh and Ors. Vs Quresha Nisabat Najmoddin Gilani and Ors.

Sanjay Maruti Barbole Vs the State of Mah

Ramesh Champalal Kankaria Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sunil Suresh Unde Vs the State of Mah and Anr.

Miss. Mehjabeen D/O Nisar Mohiuddin Farooqui Now Mehjabeen Syed Tafzilhashmi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another