Allowed

Saiyed Najer S/O. Saiyed Sandhu v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC21 Mar 2018APPLN/365/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad allowed an application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings. Relying on a prior judgment where the offence was condoned due to a planned concealed marriage, the court granted relief despite the filing of a Charge-Sheet.

What did the court decide?

The application was allowed in terms of prayer clause "B" and the Rule was made absolute, granting quashing of the F.I.R. and proceedings.

Saiyed Najer S/O. Saiyed Sandhu Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

1 CriApln 365/18

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

913 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 365 OF 2018

¶4

Saiyed Najer S/o Saiyed Sandhu,
Age 36 Years, Occ. Business,
R/o. Limbe Jalgaon, Tq. Gangapur,
District Aurangabad

¶5

APPLICANTS

¶6

V E R S U S

¶7

[1] The State of Maharashtra, Through RESPONDENTS Investigation Officer, Waluj Police Station, Taluka Gangapur, District Aurangabad

¶8

[2] Sahikh Mahemood Shaikh Ameer, Age 51 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Turkabad, Taluka Gangapur, District Aurangabad

¶9

Mr. R.V. Gore, Advocate for the applicants
Mrs. V.S. Choudhary, APP for respondent No.1/State
Mr. G.J. Pahilwan, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶10

...

¶11

CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE AND
 SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI,JJ.

¶12

 DATE : 21st SEPTEMBER, 2018

¶13

2 CriApln 365/18

¶14

ORAL JUDGMENT [PER : T.V. NALAWADE, J.] :

¶15

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By
consent of both the parties, this proceeding is taken
up for final hearing. Heard both the sides.

¶16

2.This proceeding is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. for quashing of the proceeding bearing R.C.C.
No.235/2009 pending in the Court of J.M.F.C. Gangapur,
District Aurangabad for the offences punishable under
Sections 363, 360 (A) read with Section 34 of Indian
Penal Code.

¶17

3.During argument of learned counsel for the
applicant, attention this Court was drawn to the
Judgment delivered by this Court in Criminal
Application No. 3030/2009 [Saiyed Najer S/o Saiyed
Sandhu] dated 24.11.2009. This Court has carefully
gone through paragraph No.7 of the said Judgment,
which reads as under :-

¶18

“7.Considering the submissions advanced
across the bar and after perusing the papers
of investigation it is clear that statement
of Rizwana came to be recorded by the
Investigting Officer. The said statement
discloses that Rizwana had love affair with
the applicant since long prior to the date of
incident. They used to meet at the residence
of the matrimonial aunt of Rizwana. On the
fateful date i.e. on 10.0.4.2009, as per the

¶19

3 CriApln 365/18

¶20

statement of Rizwana, she had invited/called
the applicant in the field situated behind
her house and they have already planned to
elope with each other. According to Rizwana,
as per the planning, the applicant came there
and she accompanied him from where first they
went to Dhule and thereafter they went to
Surat where they got married. According to
Rizwana, she is major and 19 years old.”

¶21

This Court had granted relief of quashing of the
F.I.R. in CR No.40/2009 in which the aforesaid case is
filed by the police. It appears that the Charge-Sheet
was already filed, but it was not brought to the
notice of this Court and the proceeding was not
amended. On this circumstance, the present proceeding
is filed. In view of the contents of paragraph No.7 of
the Judgment, referred above, in Criminal Application
No.3030/2009 dated 24.11.2009, this Court is of the
opinion that the relief needs to be granted in favour
of the applicant. In the result, application is
allowed in terms of prayer clause “B”. Rule made
absolute in above terms.

¶22

[SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI,J.] [T.V. NALAWADE, J.]

¶23

SRM/21/09/18

Saiyed Najer S/O. Saiyed Sandhu v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saiyed Najer S/O. Saiyed Sandhu 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Poonamchand S/O. Ramanand Mor Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Parmeshwar S/O. Chandrakant Yenge and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Tekchand Tanhaji Wani Thu His Gpa M/S Sunrise Trade Centre Thu Partners Shaikh Abood and Others Vs Municipal Corporation Aurangabad through Its Commissioner Aurangabad

Jafar Abdul Haq Shaikh Vs K. Subramanyam, Principal Secretary, Home Department, Mantralay, Mumbai and Others

Rohan S/O. Rajendra Kulkarni Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Swati Trimbak Khamkar and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra