Allowed

Anant Hegde and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC30 Sept 2016WP/842/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 482 of CrPC, the Bombay High Court quashed an FIR and ceased criminal proceedings after a commercial settlement was reached. The court noted the dispute had a predominantly civil flavour.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings of the pending case stand quashed and set aside, and the petitioners are permitted to make necessary application to the concerned Court for relief in terms of prayer clause (b).

Anant Hegde and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2016)

crwp842

ssp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.842 OF 2016

¶5

Anant Vighneshwar Hegde & Ors.
vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶6

...Respondents

¶7

Mr.Pranit Mishra i/b PRK and Co. for the Petitioners
Dr.F.R.SHaikh, APP for the respondent No.1
Mr.Madan Singh Khati for respondent No.2

¶8

CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
 A.A.SAYED, JJ.
 DATE : SEPTEMBER 30, 2016

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

1Rule. The learned APP waives service for the
first respondent. The learned counsel for the
second respondent waives service. Forthwith taken up
for final disposal.

¶11

2The prayer in this Petition under Article 226
of the Constitution of India read with section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 is for
quashing the FIR registered at the instance of the
second respondent for offence punishable under
sections 406 and 420 read with section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code. Even the charge sheet has been
filed by the police after completing investigation.
The learned counsel for the parties are relying upon
the settlement in the form of undertaking dated 17th
March 2016, a copy of which is annexed as Exhibit-B
to the petition. There is an affidavit of Shri

¶12

2 crwp842

¶13

Sudip P. Das a representative of the respondent No.2
stating that in terms of the undertaking, settlement
has been arrived at. It is pointed out that a sum
of Rs.30,00,000/- have been received by the second
respondent in full and final settlement of the claim
of the second respondent. The affidavit records no
objection for quashing the criminal proceedings.

¶14

3We have perused the statement on the basis of
which FIR was recorded and the charge sheet. The
dispute as reflected from the charge sheet is
predominently having a civil flavour. Now there is
a commercial settlement of the dispute. In view of
the settlement of the dispute, the law laid down by
the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh versus
State of Punjab and another1, will be applicable in
the facts of the case. As the second respondent has
set the criminal law in motion in a civil dispute
and as the police were required to investigate
into the offence, the second respondent has paid by
way of costs a sum of Rs.50,000/- to Maharashtra
State Legal Services Authority. A receipt of
payment of Rs.50,000/- is produced for perusal of
this Court.

¶15

4 Hence, we pass the following order:

¶16

(I)The proceedings of case No.831/PW/2014
pending before the Court of learned
Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court, Esplanade,
Mumbai arising out of C.R.No.106 of 2012

¶17

1(2012) 10 SCC page 303

¶18

3 crwp842

¶19

registered with Economic Offences Wing
(formerly C.R.No.212 of 2012 registered with
Agripada Police Station) stand quashed and set
aside;

¶20

(II)In the light of this order, we permit the
petitioners to make necessary application to
the concerned Court for relief in terms of
prayer clause (b);

¶21

(III) Rule is made absolute on above terms.

¶22

(A.A.SAYED,J.)

Anant Hegde and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anant Hegde and Ors. 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

District Judge 7 and Additional Session Judge Pune Vs Rupali S. Bobade Assistant Police Insepctor and Anr.

Ashok Krishna Jadhav Vs Prakash Vasant Patkar and Anr.

Janiv Nagrik Vikas Sangh through Mr. Rajaram Vanage Vs State of Maharashtra through Govt. Pleader and Ors.

Feroz Ali Khan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Balasaheb Sahebrao Lavate Patil Vs Pandurang Dhondi Jagtap and Anr.

Mahesh Shivpad Gavane and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.