Single judge order allowing a criminal application seeking quashing of an order under Section 156(3) CrPC and related proceedings by directing merger of subsequent FIR into the first case.
Petition allowed and disposed of; Second FIR directed to be merged into First FIR; Fees of appointed counsel quantified.
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.
1 955 cra 1354-18
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1354 OF 2018
Habib Ahmed Habib Abdulla @ Hammu Chaus...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
...Respondents
.......
Mr. S.S.Deshmukh, Advocate for Applicant.
.......
CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE &
K. K. SONAWANE, JJ
DATE : 18-09-2019.
ORAL JUDGMENT :
01.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard
finally by the consent of both the sides for final
disposal.
02.Proceeding is filed for relief of quashing and
setting aside the Order dated 31.1.2015 in M.A. No.
112/2015 which was pending in the Court of Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Parbhani and also the Order made
under Section 156(3) of Cr. P. C. dated 13.4.2015. The
submissions made shows that this proceeding was filed
before J. M. F. C. by one Subhash Gore on 30.1.2015. In
that proceeding he has made allegations that he was
received by selling the property which was not belonging
2 955 cra 1354-18
to vendors and consideration amount was extracted from
him. In the said matter no immediate Order under Section
156(3) was made. He then approached Police and gave
report on 24.3.2015 making the same the allegations.
Police investigate the said crime and filed charge-sheet
on 4.7.2016. In the troceeding before J. M. F. C. came to
under section 156(3) was made on 13.4.2015. In view of
these circumstances, it can be said that the first F.I.R.
Was registered on 24.3.2015 and due to Order made by
J.M.C. 13.4.2015.
03.The learned Counsel for the applicant placed
reliance of observations in Awadesh Kumar Jha @ Akhilesh
Kumar Jha and Anr. V/s The State of Bihar., (2016 3 SCC 8)
In this case the Apex Court had laid down that if there is
a subsequent F.I.R., the subsequent F.I.R. can not be
registered and the specifically information can be
considered first crime. In the present matter it can also
be done. It is open to Police to file the report in the
Court in which the charge-sheet is filed to the effect
that the case is already filed in respect of the crime
alleged to be committed against the present petitioners
that Second F.I.R. Can be merged into the First F.I.R.
Second F.I.R. Can be considered as a part of the first
case of this Court. With these directions the petition is
3 955 cra 1354-18 allowed and disposed of. The fees of the appointed Counsel is quantified at Rs. 3,000/- would be paid through
the High Court Legal services Sub-committee at Aurangabad.
[K.K.SONAWANE] [T.V.NALAWADE]
JUDGE JUDGE
Dahibhate/-
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Awadesh Kumar Jha @ Akhilesh Kumar Jha and Anr. V/s The State of Bihar., (2016 3 SCC 8)Referred¶19
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Habib Ahmed Habib Abdulla @ Hammu Chaus
The State of Maharashtra
T. V. NALAWADE
K. K. SONAWANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court