Dismissed

Shakil Mohd. Hussian Shaikh and Ors. v. Shamshu Sama Usmani and Anr.

Bombay HC26 Aug 2016WP/19/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay quashed an FIR registered against petitioners for cheating and criminal breach of trust. The Court held the matter arose from a civil dispute over immovable property which had been fully settled via consent terms filed in Small Causes Court.

What did the court decide?

The FIR No.240/14 registered under sections 406 and 420 IPC at B.K.C. Police Station was quashed and set aside.

Shakil Mohd. Hussian Shaikh and Ors. Vs Shamshu Sama Usmani… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2016)

crwp19

ssp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.19 OF 2016

¶5

Shakil Mohd. Hussain Shaikh
and others...Petitioners
vs.
Shamshu Zama Usmani & Anr. ...Respondents

¶6

...Respondents

¶7

Ms Shabans Sathe i/b S.P.Associates for the
Petitioners
Mr.Ganesh Shikshare for the respondent No.1
Ms M.H.Mhatre, APP for respondent No.2

¶8

CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
 A.A.SAYED, JJ.

¶9

 DATE : AUGUST 26, 2016

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

.Not on board. Taken on board.

¶12

1Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners
and the learned counsel for the first petitioner.
Rule. The learned APP waives service for the second
respondent. The learned counsel for the first
respondent waives service.

¶13

2The prayer in this petition under Article 226
of the Constitution of India and section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 is for quashing the
FIR registered at the instance of the first
respondent for the offences punishable under
sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

3 We have perused the statement of the first

¶15

2 crwp19

¶16

informant on the basis of which FIR was registered.
The allegation is that there was an agreement
between the petitioners and the first respondent
under which the petitioners agreed to let out a room
to the first respondent. Only allegation is that as
the first respondent was not placed in possession,
the petitioners have cheated him. In the
proceedings before the Small Causes Court between
the parties, consent terms have been filed. A copy
of the consent terms have been annexed to the
petition. Even receipt of the amounts received by
the first respondent is annexed. The first
respondent has filed an affidavit confirming receipt
of various amounts under the consent terms and has
recorded his no objection for quashing the FIR.

¶17

4Perusal of the FIR shows that the dispute is
purely a civil dispute over an immoveable property.
The same has been completely settled. Therefore, in
the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the
case of Gian Singh versus State of Punjab and
another1, this is a fit case to exercise power of
this Court for quashing the FIR.

¶18

5 Hence, we pass the following order:

¶19

(I) Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b) which reads thus:

¶20

(b) That this Hon'ble Court will be pleased to issue writ of Certiorari or a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate

¶21

1 (2012) 10 SCC page 303

¶22

3 crwp19

¶23

writ, direction or order under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India arising out of FIR
No.240/14 registered on the basis of complaint
dated 12.12.2014 in the records of the B.K.C.
Police Station under section 406 and 420 of
IPC, and after going through their validity
and/or legality and/or correctness thereof
quash and/or set aside the same.”

¶24

(II) All concerned to act upon an authenticated copy of this order.

Shakil Mohd. Hussian Shaikh and Ors. v. Shamshu Sama Usmani and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakil Mohd. Hussian Shaikh and Ors. v. Shamshu Sama Usmani and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harish Gopal Bangera Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ramlal Jagdish Prasad Agarwal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mr. Prakash Ramakant Kamat Vs Mrs. Sheela Prakash Kamat

The Gorai Macchimar Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. and 6 Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 6 Ors. Navjavan Mitra Mandal Trust (Applicants)

The Gorai Macchimar Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Javed Nafis Shaikh and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.