Dismissed

Dr. Vandana W/O. Bibhishan Garje v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC26 Apr 2016APPLN/747/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected the applicant's prayer to quash FIR No.299/2015. Holding that the FIR prima facie disclosed a cognizable offence involving alleged misappropriation of scheme funds, the court directed the police to investigate facts without delving into merits.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash criminal proceedings dismissed; Police directed to investigate.

Dr. Vandana W/O. Bibhishan Garje Vs the State… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

- 1 -

¶2

Cr.Appln.747/16

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.747/2016

¶6

Dr.Vandana w/o Bibhishan Garje.

¶7

...Applicant..

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Maharashtra & another.

¶10

...Respondent...

¶11

 .....

¶12

Shri A.N. Nagargoje, Advocate for applicant.
Shri D.R. Kale, APP for respondent nos.1 & 2.

¶13

 .....

¶14

CORAM: R.M. BORDE &
 P.R. BORA, JJ.

¶15

DATE: 26.04.2016

¶16

ORDER :

¶17

1]The applicant is praying for quashment of the
criminal proceedings initiated in pursuance to lodging of
the First Information Report on 28.10.2015 in Crime

¶18

No.299/2015. It is alleged in the First Information

¶19

Report that the firm operated by the applicant was
allotted the project under the Central scheme. It is

¶20

alleged that the funds disbursed under the scheme have
not been applied for the purpose for which those were

¶21

Cr.Appln.747/16

¶22

- 2 -

¶23

expected to be spent and as such there is mis-
appropriation of the public funds.

¶24

2]On perusal of the First Information Report, it
appears that prima facie an offence of cognizable nature
is made out. On consideration of the First Information
Report, without going into the merits and de-merits of
the contentions raised by the applicant, since an offence
is prima facie made out, the Police needs to investigate
into the same and find out the truth.

¶25

3]At this stage of the proceedings, since the contents

¶26

of the First Information Report do disclose commission of
an offence, the criminal proceedings initiated need not
be quashed. The writ petition is devoid of substance and
hence the same stands rejected.

¶27

 (P.R. BORA, J.) (R.M. BORDE, J.)

¶28

ndk/ cr2641615.doc

Dr. Vandana W/O. Bibhishan Garje v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Vandana W/O. Bibhishan Garje 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shriniwas Prabhakar Karve Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Shriniwas Prabhakar Karve Vs Swadhin Kshatriya and Others

Dr. Laxmikant Bhagwat Kawtekwar and Other Vs the State of Maharashtra and Other

Krushna S/O. Dajiba Waikar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sangita W/O Bhima Khedkar and Other Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sikandar Ali Yawar Ali Mirza. Vs the State of Maharashtra.