Two High Court petitions sought quashing of an FIR. The bench heard the matter and found that the allegations attracted the ingredients of the offence, holding no case was made out for quashing. Both petitions were dismissed.
The prayers for quashing of the FIR were dismissed.
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.
1 19-crwp1139.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAM WRIT PETITION NO.1139 OF 2015
Laxman Baliram Wagh..Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
and ors...Respondents
WITH CRIMINAM WRIT PETITION NO.1140 OF 2015
Bhalchandra S. Nikumbh..Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
and ors...Respondents
Mr.S.B.Ghute, Advocate for petitioners
Mr.M.M.Nerlikar, APP for respondent no.1
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : OCTOBER 15, 2016
PER COURT :
Heard.
2.The learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioners submits that on the same set of
2 19-crwp1139.odt
allegations, which are made in the F.I.R. under
challenge in these petitions, earlier also an
F.I.R. was lodged. He, therefore, prays that the
present F.I.R. bearing No.399 of 2016 lodged with
the CIDCO Police Station, Aurangabad, may be
quashed and set aside.
3.We have considered the submissions
advanced by the learned Counsel for the
petitioners and the contents of the F.I.R. In our
opinion, ingredients of the offence alleged
against the petitioners are attracted. Hence, no
case is made out for allowing these petitions.
Both the Writ Petitions, therefore, stand
dismissed.
[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [S.S. SHINDE, J.]
kbp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petition under Article 226 for quashing the FIR is maintainable.
Laxman Baliram Wagh
Bhalchandra S. Nikumbh
The State of Maharashtra
S.S. Shinde
Sangitrao S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court