Allowed

Irshad Mohd Rafiq Lakadiya and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC19 Dec 2016WP/4099/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a writ petition quashing a criminal complaint for offenses under IPC sections 324, 326, 506(II), 504 read with section 34. The court noted the incident was a spur-of-the-moment brawl, the complaint was settled by the family, and injuries were simple, making the special leave petition ruling applicable to quash the matter.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed for quashing of the criminal complaint.

Irshad Mohd Rafiq Lakadiya and Anr. Vs the State of… — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

spb/

¶2

58wp4099-16.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 4099 OF 2016

¶5

Mr. Irshad Mohd Rafiz Lakadiya & Anr. … Petitioners.

¶6

V/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents.

¶8

¶9

Mr. B. B. Tiwari i/by BBT Legal for the Petitioners. Mr. K. V. Saste, APP for the State-Respondent.

¶10

Mr. Samarendra Nath Choudhary, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.

¶11

¶12

CORAM : V. M. KANADE AND Ms.NUTAN D.SARDESSAI,JJ.

¶13

DATE : 19^th DECEMBER, 2016 P.C. :

¶14

1 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners, the learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No.2-Complainant.

¶15

2 This writ petition is filed by the Petitioners for quashing the criminal compliant, by consent of the complainant. The complaint was filed by Respondent No.2 for the offences punishable under sections 324, 326, 506 (II), 504

1/3

Borey

spb/

58wp4099-16.odt

read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the Petitioners.

¶21

3 Respondent No. 2-complainant has filed an affidavit stating therein that the matter is now settled between the parties. We had interviewed the complainant on the last date and he had reiterated whatever he has stated in his affidavit dated 23^rd November, 2016. We had asked the learned APP to take instructions and find out whether there are any criminal antecedents against the Petitioners herein. Learned APP Shri Saste, on taking instructions, has submitted that there are no criminal antecedents either against the Petitioners or Respondent No.2.

¶22

4 We are satisfied that the incident took place on the spur of the moment and the parties have now settled the dispute on account of intervention by the family and friends. The process of restorative justice is in vogue in India, Europe and America and by virtue of the said practice, the complainant/the victim and the accused are allowed to meet and settle their dispute so that the pain which is suffered by the victim is conveyed to the accused and by this process, the accused also realizes his mistake and there is restoration and rehabilitation of both the victim as well as the accused.

2/3

Borey

spb/

58wp4099-16.odt

5 In the present case, though initially an offence under section 326 of the IPC was registered but later on it was converted in to section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. We perused the injury certificate and we find that the injuries suffered by the victim are not grievous and are simple in nature. Taking into consideration all these facts of the case, we are of the view that the ratio of the judgment in the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in (2014) 6 S.C.C. 466 would squarely apply to the facts of the present case.

¶28

6 Hence, this writ petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶29

7 The Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶30

(Ms.NUTAN D.SARDESSAI,J) (V.M.KANADE,J)

¶31

3/3

¶32

Borey

Irshad Mohd Rafiq Lakadiya and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irshad Mohd Rafiq Lakadiya and Anr. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sagar Shivaji Tambe Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mr. Shashikant Atmaram Mali Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rutuja Gadkari and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Maharashtra Knowledge Corporation Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mahesh Havewalla Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Dilip Singh Rajput Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.