The High Court of Bombay dismissed a criminal writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR registered under Sections 452, 504, and 506 IPC. The Court held that the averments showed preparation to cause hurt and fear of assault, and that doubts regarding the petitioner's location were matters for trial, not quashing.
The Writ Petition is rejected.
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
JPP
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3510 OF 2021
Shradha Sunil Kasurde … Petitioner
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
... Respondent
Mr. R.N. Gite for the Petitioner Ms. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the Respondent - State
CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR & SARANG V. KOTWAL, JJ. DATE : 12 OCTOBER 2021
P.C. :-
Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2
2021 the Petitioner alongwith another person named Sachin Sandhan trespassed in the house of the informant with wooden sticks and demanded the pending amounts from the informant and threatened him that if he does not pay the amount, he will be killed by the wooden sticks. Thereafter, they started physical scuffling and giving abuses. Brother of the informant arrived and separated them.
3
is concerned, it will be defence of the Petitioner which the Petitioner can agitate at an appropriate stage. The Petitioner also has remedy under the Code of Criminal Procedure of seeking directions. In the light thereof, this cannot be considered as rarest of rare case to quash the FIR as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v/s. State of Maharashtra and Ors.1
6. The Writ Petition is rejected.
SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
NITIN JAMDAR, J.
Digitally signed by JYOTI JYOTI PRAKASH PRAKASH PAWAR PAWAR Date: 2021.10.14 15:16:06 +0530
1 AIR 2021 SC 1918
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition for quashing the FIR is maintainable in view of the ingredients of Sections 452, 504, and 506 IPC made out from the allegations.
Whether the case falls under the 'rarest of rare' category to quash the FIR.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
M/s. Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v/s. State of Maharashtra and Ors.Referred¶20
AIR 2021 SC 1918 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shradha Sunil Kasurde
The State of Maharashtra
Nitin Jamdar
Sarang V. Kotwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
