Dismissed

Altaf Imam Husain Bagwan and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC29 Oct 2021APL/603/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court rejected Criminal Application seeking quashal of FIR and deletion of Section 307 IPC. The bench held that FIR details showed armed assault attempt with deadly weapons, making out an offence. Case for quashing under settled parameters was not made out.

What did the court decide?

Relief to quash FIR No.203/2021 and charge-sheet rejected; application to remove Section 307 IPC dismissed.

Altaf Imam Husain Bagwan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

skn 1 20-APL-603.2021.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 603 OF 2021

¶4

… Altaf Imam Husain Bagwan and others. Applicants. V/s.

¶5

The State of Maharashtra and another. … Respondents.

¶6

Mr.Rahul Kadam for the Applicant. Ms.S.D.Shinde, APP for the Respondent- State.

¶7

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ.

¶8

DATE : 29 October 2021.

¶9

Digitally signed by SANJAY SANJAYKASHINATH KASHINATHNANOSKAR NANOSKAR Date: 2021.10.30 15:43:09 +0530

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the Applicant.

¶12

2 This application is filed on behalf of 26 Applicants seeking to quash FIR No.203/2021 and the charge-sheet filed before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Baramati. Another relief is sought to quash/ delete/ alter section 307 of IPC from the chargesheet.

¶13

We have perused the contents of the FIR. The FIR states that the informant was an editor of a weekly newspaper and he had published certain news exposing corruption in the local madrassa. He stated that on 19 March 2021, the Applicants armed with wooden sticks, swords and stones assaulted the informant-

¶14

skn 2 20-APL-603.2021.doc

¶15

Respondent No.2 and the other victims. One of the Applicants assaulted the informant with a sword on his head which the informant dodged and he received injury near his left eye. All the Applicants were shouting that the informant and other victims must be killed. Some of them also assaulted the informant and others with stones. Accordingly, Respondent No.2 filed an FIR against the Applicants stating that since Respondent No.2 had exposed corruption in the local madrassa, he was assaulted by the Applicants.

¶16

Having gone through the contents of the FIR and the statements, it is clear that the case for quashing under the settled parameters is not made out. The informant has given details of the incident. The Applicants were armed with deadly weapons and tried to assault the informant. It cannot be said that no offence is made out. The nature of weapons used, the attempt to assault on the head and all the Applicants together assaulted show that at this stage it cannot be observed that offence under section 307 is not made out. The arguments advanced before us relate to the defence of the Applicants which will have to be considered at the time of trial.

¶17

In these circumstances, looking at the contents of the FIR, neither of the reliefs can be granted. The application is accordingly rejected.

¶18

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

¶19

(NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

Altaf Imam Husain Bagwan and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Altaf Imam Husain Bagwan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prashant Govind Shewale and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Abhishek Sureshkumar Singh @ Harsh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pravin Sheshdhar Mishra Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vikram Gurbir Singh and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Atul Vilas Gaonkar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Anil Vasantrao Deshmukh Vs Directorate of Enforcement and Anr.