Allowed

Maya W/O. Kishandas Rijwani and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC25 Feb 2019APPLN/493/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed two criminal applications filed for quashing FIRs registered under various IPC and SC/ST Act sections. Both applications were disposed of based on the settlement of the underlying dispute and the informants' consent, citing Gian Singh as precedent to prevent abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Both Criminal Application No.492/2019 and No.493/2019 were allowed; Rule made absolute; FIRs bearing C.R. No.170/2018 and C.R. No.173/2018 quashed and set aside.

Maya W/O. Kishandas Rijwani and Anr. Vs the State of… — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

Cri. Appln. No.492/2019 with Cri. Appln. No.493/2019

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.492 OF 2019

¶5

Pravin s/o Narsingrao Jethewad, Age 33 years, Occu. Business, R/o Near Mayur Talkies, Nanded, District Nanded. 2. Yogesh s/o Narsingrao Jethewad, Age 31 years, Occu. Business, R/o Near Mayur Talkies, Nanded, District Nanded. 3. Narsingrao s/o Dattatraya Jethewad, Age 60 years, Occu. Business, R/o Near Mayur Talkies, Nanded, District Nanded. ... APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through Vimantal Police Station, Nanded, District Nanded (Copy to be served on Public Prosecutor, Hgih Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad) 2. Maya Kishandas Rijwani, Age major, Occu. Household, R/o Opposite Collector, Office, Nanded ... RESPONDENTS

¶6

Shri S.S. Gangakhedkar, Advocate for applicants Shri R.V. Dasalkar, A.P.P. for respondent No.1 Shri R.R. Karpe, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶7

WITH

¶8

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.493 OF 2019

¶9

Cri. Appln. No.492/2019 with Cri. Appln. No.493/2019

¶10

¶11

Maya w/o Kishandas Rijwani, Age 62 years, Occu. Business, R/o Opposite Collector, Office, Nanded 2. Ashok s/o Kishandas Rijwani, Age 42 years, Occu. R/o as above. ... APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through Vimantal Police Station, Nanded, District Nanded (Copy to be served on Public Prosecutor, Hgih Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad) 2. Pravin s/o Narsingrao Jethewad, Age 33 years, Occu. Business, R/o Near Mayur Talkies, Nanded, District Nanded. ... RESPONDENTS

¶12

Shri R.R. Karpe, Advocate for applicants Shri R.V. Dasalkar, A.P.P. for respondent No.1 Shri S.S. Gangakhedkar, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶13

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

¶14

DATED : 25th February, 2019

¶15

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

¶16

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and taken up for final hearing with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶17

Cri. Appln. No.492/2019 with Cri. Appln. No.493/2019

¶18

¶19

Criminal Application No.492/2019 is filed with the following substantive prayer :

¶20

(B) By an order of this Hon'ble Court, kindly quash and set aside the F.I.R. bearing C.R. No.170/2018 dated 8.7.2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 354A, 294, 109, 504, 506 read with 34 of I.P.C., as against applicants.

¶21

Criminal Application No.493/2019 is filed with the following substantive prayer :

¶22

(B) By an order of this Hon'ble Court, kindly quash and set aside the F.I.R. bearing C.R. No.173/2018 lodged on 9.7.2018, registered at Vimantal Police Station, Nanded for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 294, 506 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, as against applicants.

¶23

Pursuant to the notices issued to the respondents, respective respondent No.2 in both the applications have filed affidavits. In both the affidavits, it is stated that, the applicants in respective applications and respondent No.2 have amicably settled the dispute and decided to withdraw the cases against each other so as to maintain cordial relations in future. It is

¶24

Cri. Appln. No.492/2019 with Cri. Appln. No.493/2019

¶25

¶26

stated that, all of them have decided to withdraw the cases filed against each other.

¶27

In Criminal Application No.492/2019, F.I.R. bearing C.R. No.170/2018 is arising out of the incident dated 8.7.2018 and the Sections which are invoked are 354-A, 294, 109, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In Criminal Application No.493/2019, C.R. No.173/2018 lodged for the offences punishable under Sections 452, 294, 506 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The allegations in both the First Information Reports that the incident which is alleged in both the First Information Reports is one and the same. It is true that, in C.R. No.173/2018, one of the alleged offences is under Section 3(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. However, it appears that, the entire incident has taken place in the house of informant in C.R. No.173/2018. Therefore, the alleged offence has not taken place in the public view. As already observed, there was some civil dispute between the parties which gave rise for the aforesaid incident and consequentially registering two First Information Reports.

¶28

Since the parties have amicably settled the civil as well as criminal disputes and to that effect the informants have

¶29

Cri. Appln. No.492/2019 with Cri. Appln. No.493/2019

¶30

¶31

specifically stated before this Court that they have no objection for quashing the First Information Reports. In that view of the matter, and since the parties have amicably settled the dispute and the informants may not support the allegations in the First Information Reports, the chances of conviction of the accused would be bleak. The further continuation of investigation/ proceedings on the basis of aforesaid crimes would be an exercise in futility and abuse of the process of law/ Court. Therefore, keeping in view the exposition of law by the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & anr. reported in [(2012) 10 SCC 303] , both the applications deserve to be allowed.

¶32

In the result, both the criminal applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause (B). Rule made absolute in above terms. Both the applications are disposed of.

¶33

Parties to act upon authenticated copy of this order.

¶34

R.G. AVACHAT

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

S.S. SHINDE JUDGE

¶37

fmp/

Maya W/O. Kishandas Rijwani and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maya W/O. Kishandas Rijwani and Anr. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kailas Shankar Navekar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bhausaheb Bhimrao Palve Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mohd. Azharuddin Abdul Matin Farooqui and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Anil S/O. Jijaji Ubale and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Abhijit S/O Machindra Patare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Pravin S/O. Narsingrao Jethewad and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.