This criminal application sought quashing of an FIR registered against the applicant due to a confrontation with MSRTC staff regarding bus delays. The High Court observed the staff's misconduct and granted relief, quashing the FIR to prevent abuse of process.
Relief granted in terms of prayer clause (B); Rule made absolute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 Application 1281 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Criminal Application No.1281 of 2019
Versus
Shri. S.A. Deshmukh, Advocate, for applicant.
Shri. D.R. Kale, Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondent No.1.
Smt. Nirmala K. Helkute, Advocate, holding for Smt. R.D. Reddy, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
Coram: T.V. NALAWADE & S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.
Date: 06 NOVEMBER 2019
2 Application 1281 of 2019
JUDGMENT (Per T.V. Nalawade, J.):
3 Application 1281 of 2019
made in other bus but the applicant was not satisfed and due to that he started shouting. It is contended that the applicant then virtually quarreled and pushed and pulled him and gave threats. It is contended that the applicant was held by the staf and inquiry was made with him about his name and other things and then he was taken to police station. Report was then given to police and the crime came to be registered for the aforesaid ofences.
4 Application 1281 of 2019
conduct and approach of the persons working in the MSRTC. If the bus is late it is the duty of the staf members to go to the platform meant for the bus and make request to passengers to wait for some time and immediately arrange other bus. The contention of the applicant shows that such steps were not taken immediately and so the passenger must have become angry. When passengers become angry it is further duty of the staf members to request them to cooperate and somehow satisfy them as it is the staf of MSRTC who is at fault. This did not happen. It is surprising that when one passenger raised grievance and showed his anger, step like giving report to police for registration of crime was taken by the staf of the MSRTC. It is unfortunate step. This will not serve the purpose for which the MSRTC is created. This Court holds that staf of the MSRTC did not show sensitiveness and punctuality was also not shown by the staf while giving services to passengers. Taking of such step against passengers will cause further damage and loss to the MSRTC. It can be said that the applicant was a person who wanted to raise grievance and against him all the staf gathered and they took him to police
5 Application 1281 of 2019
station and saw to it that the crime is registered against him. This Court has no hesitation to hold that it was the fault of the MSRTC and due to that the applicant was raising his grievance. The proceeding cannot be allowed to go on and it will be abuse of process of law. Further it is also not in the interest of public at large and particularly in the interest of the Government Corporation like MSRTC. So, following order.
Sd/- Sd/- (S.M. GAVHANE, J.) (T.V. NALAWADE, J.)
rsl
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the quashing of the FIR against the applicant was necessary to prevent abuse of process of law considering the fault of the MSRTC staff.
Whether proceeding under the Indian Penal Code against a passenger raising a legitimate grievance against state service is in the interest of public.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sudhanshu s/o Gajanan Lathkar
The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Inspector, Police Station Kranti Chowk, City Aurangabad
Sanjay s/o Motilal Bankeshwar
T.V. Nalawade
S.M. Gavhane
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
