Partly allowed

Sk Habib Ur Raheman S/O Sk Zaki Ur Raheman and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC26 Oct 2016APPLN/5706/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Application No. 5706 of 2016, the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad bench quashed criminal proceedings under sections 498-A, 323, 313, 506, and 34 of the IPC. The quashing was granted based on the parties' settlement and amendment of Section 482 CrPC, deeming further hearing unnecessary after amicable settlement.

What did the court decide?

Quashed and set aside criminal proceedings bearing S.T.No.26 of 2013 against the applicants.

Sk Habib Ur Raheman S/O Sk Zaki Ur Raheman and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

1 70-CRAPPLN5706.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5706 OF 2016

¶4

SK. HABIB UR RAHEMAN S/O SK ZAKI UR RAHEMAN
AND OTHERS

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

¶7

Mr.W.A.Shaikh, Advocate for Applicants

¶8

Mrs.P.V.Diggikar, APP for respondent no.1

¶9

Mr.S.M.A.Jahagirdar, Advocate for respondent no.2

¶10

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND

¶11

SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : OCTOBER 26, 2016

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

Heard respondent no.2 – Nazneen Begum who

¶14

has been identified by Advocate Mr.S.M.A.

¶15

Jahagirdar and applicant no.1 – Sk. Habib Ur

¶16

Raheman who has been identified by Advocate Mr.Sk.

¶17

Wajeed Ahmed. They have filed the terms of
settlement. They voluntarily admit the terms of

¶18

settlement now read over and explained to them.
They have decided to withdraw the proceedings, the

¶19

2 70-CRAPPLN5706.odt

¶20

subject matter of this application, in view of the
settlement.

¶21

2.So far as the proceedings bearing
S.T.No.26 of 2013 registered against the
applicants for the offences punishable under
Sections 498-A, 323, 313, 506 read with Section 34
of the Indian Penal Code are concerned, we are
inclined to quash and set aside the same in view
of the powers vested under Section 482 of the Code

¶22

of Criminal Procedures since no good purpose would
be served by keeping the said case pending for
hearing after amicable settlement between the
parties.

¶23

3. So far as other pending proceedings are
concerned, we direct the parties to appear before
the Courts concerned. The Courts concerned would
pass necessary orders in those pending proceedings
in view of the terms of settlement filed by the
parties before this Court today.

¶24

3 70-CRAPPLN5706.odt

¶25

4.In view of the above, we quash and set
aside the criminal proceedings bearing S.T.No.26
of 2013 pending against the applicants before the
learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Parbhani, arising
out of Crime No.127 of 2011 registered with Nanal
Peth Police Station, Parbhani.

¶26

5.With these directions, we allow this
application partly. It is accordingly disposed of.

¶27

6.The parties to act on certified copies of

¶28

this order.

¶29

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [S.S. SHINDE, J.]

¶30

kbp

Sk Habib Ur Raheman S/O Sk Zaki Ur Raheman and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sk Habib Ur Raheman S/O Sk Zaki Ur Raheman and Others 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Vs Ankush Bhimrao Jagtap and Ors.

Firoj Akbar Shaikh and Other Vs the State of Maharashtra

Hanuman S/O Dattarao Karkar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ravi S/O Ganpatrao Madrewar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Hemant S/O Sadanand Surve Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

1. Mohd Ifran Abdul Mannan Ghongade. Vs 1. the State of Mharashtra.