Allowed

Santosh Narayan Amin v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC17 Apr 2018WP/195/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR involving offences under Sections 354, 323, 504, and 506 IPC. The court found that the dispute between the petitioner and respondent no.2 had been amicably resolved, and the respondent withdrew the wish to proceed with prosecution. Relying on the Supreme Court, the court held no useful purpose would be served by continuing

What did the court decide?

The petition for quashing of the FIR was allowed. Petitioner and Respondent no.2 directed to deposit Rs.10,000 each with State Legal Aid Fund.

Santosh Narayan Amin Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2018)

1/4

904 wp 195.2018

Dusane

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.195 OF 2018

¶6

Mr. Santosh Narayan Amin .... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State of Maharashtra & Anr.

¶9

.... Respondents

¶10

Mr. Mohitrao J. Jadhav for the Petitioner. Mrs. P.P. Shinde, APP for the State. Mr. P.K. Singh i/by Mr. S.H. Mishra for Respondent no.2

¶11

Coram : R.M. Savant AND

¶12

Sarang V. Kotwal, JJ Date : 17^th April, 2018

¶13

P.C.

¶14

1 The above petition has been filed for quashing of the F.I.R. being CR. No.54 of 2017 registered with Borivali Police

¶15

Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The said F.I.R. has arisen out of the dispute between the Petitioner and the Respondent

¶16

no.2 who were good friends and were working in the Hotel

¶17

Industry.

¶18

Dusane 2/4 904 wp 195.2018

¶19

2 It is not necessary to dilate further on facts in view of

¶20

the fact that the Respondent no.2, Ms. Dipli Dineshsingh Bisen

¶21

has filed an affidavit bearing today's date i.e.17^th April, 2018 affirmed in this Court. In the context of the relief sought in the

¶22

present petition, paragraphs 5, 9 and 11 of the said affidavit are material and are reproduced hereinudner:

¶23

“5 “That now at this stage/juncture, I and the Petitioner cleared and resolved all our misunderstanding and dispute through intervention of our parents.

¶24

9 That whatever have been stated herein, this Affidavit is true, correct and carved out with own free and sweet will and without any coercion, force, intimidation, fear, apprehension, anxiety, angst, agony and anguish or under pressure of Petitioner, family members and friends.

¶25

11 That no useful purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution pursuant to the aforesaid F.I.R., in the interest of justice and all fairness that the said F.I.R. to be quashed.”

¶26

3 Respondent no.2 Dipti Bisen is personally present in

¶27

Court. She is identified by the learned counsel, Mr. P.K. Singh h/for Mr. S.H. Mishra. She is also identified by her PAN Card

¶28

Dusane 3/4 904 wp 195.2018

¶29

bearing No. BJBPB0914M. When put in the box and queried, she states that she has read and understood the contents of the said affidavit, which has been tendered today by the learned counsel. She further states that she has signed the affidavit of her own free will and volition, she lastly states that she does not want to proceed with the F.I.R. in question in view of settlement between the parties.

¶30

4 The Petitioner, Santosh Narayan Amin is also personally present in Court. He is identified by the learned counsel, Mr. Jadhav. He is also identified by his Adhar Card bearing No. 4982 0518 0495. When put in the box and queried, he accepts the factum of the settlement arrived at between him and the Respondent no.2. Having regard to the affidavit filed by the respondent no.2 and the statements made by the respondent no.2 and the Petitioner, when put in the box and queried, the same indicate that the parties have amicably resolved their dispute and as a result of which the respondent no.2 does not desire to proceed with the F.I.R. in question.

¶31

4/4 904 wp 195.2018

¶32

Dusane

¶33

5 Having regard to the judgments of the Apex Court in the matter of Gian Singh V/s State of Punjab & Anr . reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of

¶34

Punjab & Anr ., reported in (2014) AIR SCW, 2065 no useful purpose would be served in keeping the proceedings pending. The petition would accordingly be required to be allowed and is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).

¶35

6 In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Petitioner and the Respondent no.2 to deposit costs of Rs.5,000/- each i.e. totalling Rs.10,000/- with the State Legal

¶36

Aid Fund within six weeks from date. Receipts to be obtained and filed in the Registry.

¶37

(Sarang V. Kotwal, J.) (R.M. Savant, J.)

Santosh Narayan Amin v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Narayan Amin 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijendra Vijayraj Ranka and 2 Ors. Vs Hemraj Devkarandas Metals and Minerals Ltd. and Anr.

Bharat Bhushan S/O Omprakash Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ashish Aravind Chaubey @ Bunty Vs the Dy. Commissioner of Police and Ors.

Ashwini Rajendrakumar Tirmake and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Lalita Vijay Desai Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Willish Mukesh Maru Vs the State of Maharashtra