Allowed

Jiva @ Jivan S/O. Bhavsing Giri and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC8 Feb 2019APPLN/3454/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, allowed two criminal applications seeking quashing of FIRs. The court observed that the parties had amicably settled the dispute through a village Panchayat. Consequently, further investigation would be futile. The applications were allowed subject to the deposit of specified sums into a charitable account within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Rule made absolute and applications disposed of, subject to the deposit of Rs.1000 per applicant plus a lump sum into a specific charitable account within four weeks.

Jiva @ Jivan S/O. Bhavsing Giri and Others Vs the State of… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶2

:: 1 ::

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

¶4

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3454 OF 2018

¶6

Jiva @ Jivan s/o Bhavsing Giri Age 33 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.

¶7

Baba s/o Bhavsing Giri Age 38 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶8

Ravi s/o Dharasing Giri, Age 28 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶9

Sajan s/o Mohan Giri, Age 41 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶10

Amar s/o Satva Giri, Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶11

Gopi s/o Arjun Giri, Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶12

Balu @ Balaji s/o Arjun Giri, Age 18 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶13

Kiran s/o Dharasing Giri, Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶14

Shrimant s/o Shiva Chavan, Age major, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶15

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶16

:: 2 ::

¶17

Kanhiyya s/o Shiva Chavan, Age 25 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶18

Sandu s/o Narayan Giri, Age 39 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶19

Lakhan s/o Yuvraj Giri, Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶20

Ashok s/o Mohan Chavan, Age 49 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶21

Akash s/o Yuvraj Giri, Age 28 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶22

Yuvraj s/o Shankar Giri, Age 46 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶23

Mukesh s/o Kisan Giri, Age 25 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶24

Gaju @ Gajanan s/o Shiva Giri, Age 18 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶25

Sandeep s/o Supdu Giri, Age 18 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶26

Supdu s/o Gulab Giri, Age 51 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶27

Badal s/o Gulab Giri, Age 36 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶28

Viki s/o Raosaheb Giri, Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶29

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶30

:: 3 ::

¶31

22.	Raosaheb s/o Motiram Giri, Age 52 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.
23.	Vilas s/o Ramesh Giri, Age 21 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.
24.	Ramesh s/o Motiram Giri, Age 56 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.
25.	Jagan s/o Motiram Giri, Age 20 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.
26.	Jivan s/o Motiram Giri, Age 28 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.
27.	Geeta Supdu Giri, Age 36 years, Occu. Household, R/o as above.
28.	Sitaram s/o Motiram Giri, Age 46 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.
29.	Mathura Bhavsing Giri, Age 19 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above. …	APPLICANTS
	VERSUS
1.	The State of Maharashtra through Police Officer, Bhokardan Police Station, Taluka Bhokardan, District Jalna.
	(Copy to be served on Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad)
2.	Pritilal s/o Ramlal Giri, Age 46 years, Occu. Labour,

¶32

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶33

:: 4 ::

¶34

R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna. … RESPONDENTS

¶35

Shri S.R. Andhale, Advocate for applicants Shri K.S. Patil, A.P.P. for respondent No.1 Shri A.G. Ambetkar, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶36

W I T H

¶37

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3455 OF 2018

¶38

1.	Pritilal s/o Ramlal Giri, Age 52 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
2.	Sunil Champalal Bagde, Age 32 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
3.	Satyam s/o Ramesh Chavan, Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
4.	Bharat s/o Ramesh Chavan, Age 26 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
5.	Vishal s/o Pritilal Giri, Age 21 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
6.	Manoj s/o Madan Giri, Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.

¶39

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶40

:: 5 ::

¶41

7.	Laxman s/o Madan Giri,
	Age 20 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
8.	Yogesh s/o Kailas Giri, Age 38 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
9.	Ravi s/o Jalam Giri, Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
10.	Arun s/o Magan Pawar, Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
11.	Kiran s/o Ashok Giri, Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
12.	Ashok s/o Ramlal Giri, Age 50 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
13.	Pankaj s/o Ashok Giri, Age 19 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
14.	Deepak s/o Pandit Rathod, Age 33 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna.
15.	Sandeep s/o Pandit Rathod, Age 29 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.
16.	Anil s/o Champalal Bagde,
	Age 24 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶42

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶43

:: 6 ::

¶44

Gajanan s/o Gulab Muley @ Giri Age 23 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶45

Shyam s/o Pandit Rathod, Age 25 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶46

Hari s/o Kailas Chavan, Age 32 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶47

Chandan s/o Uttam Chavan, Age 40 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶48

Uttam s/o Ganpat Chavan, Age 71 years, Occu. Labour, R/o as above.

¶49

Seema w/o Yogesh Giri, Age 31 years, Occu. Household, R/o as above.

¶50

Bebabai w/o Jalam Giri, Age 32 years, Occu. Household, R/o as above.

¶51

Jaya w/o Sandeep Giri, Age 27 years, Occu. Household, R/o as above.

¶52

Kajal w/o Hari Chavan, Age 31 years, Occu. Household, R/o as above.

¶53

Malan w/o Ashok Giri, Age 62 years, Occu. Household, R/o as above.

¶54

Shobhabai w/o Ramesh Chavan, Age 48 years, Occu. Household, R/o as above.

¶55

Reena w/o Dinesh Giri, Age 32 years, Occu. Household,

¶56

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶57

:: 7 ::

¶58

R/o as above.

¶59

… APPLICANTS

¶60

VERSUS

¶61

The State of Maharashtra through Police Officer, Bhokardan Police Station, Taluka Bhokardan, District Jalna.

¶62

(Copy to be served on Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad)

¶63

Sajan Mohan Giri, Age 38 years, Occu. Labour, R/o Fattepur, Tq. Bhokardan, District Jalna. … RESPONDENTS

¶64

Shri A.G. Ambetkar, Advocate for applicants Shri K.S. Patil, A.P.P. for respondent No.1 Shri S.R. Andhale, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶65

CORAM: S.S. SHINDE AND R.G. AVACHAT, JJ.

¶66

DATED : 8th February, 2019

¶67

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER S.S. SHINDE, J.):

¶68

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶69

Heard the counsel appearing for the parties. Criminal Application No.3454/2018 takes exception to the F.I.R.

¶70

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶71

:: 8 ::

¶72

No.302/2018, registered at Bhokardan Police Station, Taluka Bhokardan, District Jalna under Sections 307, 341, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 109, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

¶73

Criminal Application No.3455/2018 takes exception to the F.I.R. No.303/2018, registered at Bhokardan Police Station, Taluka Bhokardan, District Jalna under Sections 307, 341, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 109, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

¶74

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants and private respondents, on instructions, submit that, the parties have amicably settled the dispute before the Mahatma Gandhi Tanta Mukti Gav Samiti of village Fattepur, Taluka Bhoakrdan, District Jalna. It is submitted that, since the parties have settled the dispute amicably with the intervention of Panch Mandal of the village and decided to maintain cordial relations in future and to avoid any such unpleasant incident in future, therefore, both the applications may be allowed.

¶75

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants in Criminal Application No.3454/2018, on instructions, submit that, each of the applicant will contribute Rs.1000/- (Rupees one

¶76

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶77

:: 9 ::

¶78

thousand) each and amount of Rs.29,000/- (Rupees twenty nine thousand) for noble cause in Account of Shri Sai Gramin Punarrachana Sanstha, Aurangabad bearing Saving A/c No.60225618174 in Bank of Maharashtra, Satara Branch, Aurangabad within a period of four weeks from today.

¶79

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants in Criminal Application No.3455/2018, on instructions, makes a statement that, each of the applicant will contribute Rs.1000/(Rupees one thousand) and total amount of Rs.28,000/- (Rupees twenty eight thousand) will be deposited for noble cause in Account of Shri Sai Gramin Punarrachana Sanstha, Aurangabad bearing Saving A/c No.60225618174 in Bank of Maharashtra, Satara Branch, Aurangabad within a period of four weeks from today.

¶80

Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State, relying upon the investigation papers, submits that, this Court may pass appropriate orders keeping in view the material placed on record.

¶81

We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective applicants and learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents.

¶82

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶83

:: 10 ::

¶84

Learned counsel for the applicants has tendered across bar amicable settlement arrived at between the parties before the Mahatma Gandhi Tanta Mukti Gav Samiti, Fattepur, Taluka Bhokardan, District Jalna. The same is taken on record. The respective parties are present before the Court and identified by the respective counsel appearing for them.

¶85

We have perused the investigating papers. Admittedly, charge sheets/ reports are not yet filed in both the crimes. It appears that, investigation is in progress. It further appears from the allegations made in both the crimes against each other. There was sudden provocation and there are casualties in both the groups. It is true that one of the injured has suffered grievous injury. However, keeping in view the fact that the parties have amicably settled the matter with the intervention of Panch Committee of the said village with assurance that all of them will maintain cordial relations in future and will not further indulge in such incident, we are inclined to allow these applications.

¶86

Keeping in view the affidavits filed by the respondent No.2 and injured witnesses, and also the averments in the respective applications, it is crystal clear that the informants and also the injured witnesses will not support the prosecution case,

¶87

Cri. Appln. No.3454/2018 with Cri. Appln. No.3455/2018

¶88

:: 11 ::

¶89

inasmuch as they have already amicably settled the dispute and, therefore, further continuation of investigation arising out of aforesaid two crimes or further proceedings would be exercise in futility and would tantamount to abuse of the process of law/ Court. Chances of conviction of the applicants will be bleak. Therefore, taking overall view of the matter, and subject to depositing the aforementioned amount in aforementioned Account by the applicants, we are inclined to allow both the applications.

¶90

Accordingly, Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (B) in both the applications, subject to depositing the aforesaid amount in each application. Both the applications stand disposed of.

¶91

We make it clear that, unless the aforesaid amount is deposited in the aforesaid Account, this order will not take effect.

¶92

R.G. AVACHAT JUDGE

¶93

S.S. SHINDE JUDGE

¶94

fmp/

Jiva @ Jivan S/O. Bhavsing Giri and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jiva @ Jivan S/O. Bhavsing Giri and Others 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

Yashwant S/O. Devidasrao Bhore Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ramrao Bandurao Raut Vs the Gram Panchayat Thru Village Devt Officer Kitti Adgaon Tq Majalgaon Dist Beed and Others

Balasaheb S/O. Sambhaji Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Santosh S/O. Suryabhan Kale (C-6552) Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Amol Ramdas Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Pritilal S/O. Ramlal Giri and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.