Allowed

Parasram S/O Sakharam Bodele and 3 Others v. the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Its Pso, Sakoli Police Station, Bhandara, Dist. Bhandara

Bombay HC23 Jun 2022APL/311/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a Criminal Appeal seeking quashing of an FIR registered for cheating and criminal breach of trust. The Court held that since the matter arose from a settled private dispute, the application for quashment under Section 482 CrPC was allowed.

What did the court decide?

First Information Report under Crime No.369/2021 registered under Sections 420, 406 r/w 34 IPC against Applicants Nos. 2 to 4 is quashed and set aside.

Parasram S/O Sakharam Bodele and 3 Others Vs the State of… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

apl311.2022

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.311/2022

¶6

Parasram S/o Sakharam Bodele, aged about 64 Yrs., Occ. Retired, R/o Shrinagar Colony, Ward No.3 Sendhurvafa, Tah. Sakoli, Dist. Bhandara.

¶7

Kamlesh S/o Dashrath Dongre, aged about 40 Yrs., Occ. Service, R/o Khaba Jamli Road, Near Hanuman Temple, Ward No.3, Satalwada, Sakoli, Dist. Bhandara.

¶8

Rohit S/o Subhash Hatwar, aged about 30 Yrs., Occ. Private, R/o Nilagondi, Salebhata, Taluka Lakhni, Dist. Bhandara.

¶9

Nilesh S/o Jagdish Badole, aged about 35 Yrs., Occ. Private, R/o Sendurwafa, Ward No.3, Shrinagar Colony, Sakoli, Dist. Bhandara. ...

¶10

Appellants

¶11

Versus -

¶12

The State of Maharashtra, through its Police Station Officer, Police Station Sakoli, Dist. Bhandara.

... Respondent

apl311.2022

Mr. R.V. Khaprade, Advocate for the applicants.

¶17

Mr. S.D. Sirpurkar, A.P.P. for the Respondent.

¶18

CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND G.A. SANAP, JJ.

¶19

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Sunil B. Shukre, J.)

¶20

Heard. Rule . Rule made returnable forthwith.

¶21

Heard finally by consent.

¶22

Applicant No.1 is the complainant on whose

¶23

complaint offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code are registered against

¶24

the applicants. Applicant No.1 on the one hand and the remaining applicants on the other state that dispute constituting the complaint made by applicant No.1 in police station has been amicably settled by them and that is the reason why the complainant and the accused have filed this joint application

¶25

3 apl311.2022

¶26

under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking quashing of the F.I.R.

¶27

The applicant No.1 and remaining applicants are personally present before the Court and they are identified by the learned counsel. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant No.1 and the remaining applicants have voluntarily entered into the settlement and that they would abide by the terms and conditions of the settlement. The submission so made by the learned counsel for the applicants including the applicant No.1 is accepted.

¶28

Learned A.P.P. submits that appropriate orders in the matter may be passed.

¶29

The F.I.R. discloses private dispute between the parties and, therefore, in view of settled law including Narinder Singh and others V/s. State of Punjab and another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 , we are of the view that this application

¶30

4 apl311.2022

¶31

deserves to be allowed. The application is allowed in terms of

¶32

prayer clause (i) which is reproduced as under:-

¶33

“i. quash and set aside the First Information Report registered with nonapplicant vide Crime No.369/2021 under Section 420, 406 R/w 34 of Indian Penal Code against applicant Nos.2 to 4.”

¶34

This is however subject to the condition that all the applicants shall jointly and severally pay costs of 30,000/-₹ (Thirty Thousand Only) which shall be deposited in the account of District Jail, Bhandara for the library of prisoners within two weeks from the date of the order, failing which this order shall stand cancelled without reference to this Court and the criminal application shall stand restored to the original file of the Court.

¶35

(G.A. SANAP, J.) (SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)

¶36

Tambaskar.

¶37

Signed By:NILESH VILASRAO TAMBASKAR Private Secretary Signing Date:24.06.2022 15: 3018

Parasram S/O Sakharam Bodele and 3 Others v. the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Its Pso, Sakoli Police Station, Bhandara, Dist. Bhandara

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parasram S/O Sakharam Bodele and 3 Others v. the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Its Pso, Sakoli Police Station, Bhandara, Dist. Bhandara

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

Rupesh S/O Laxman Landge Vs State of Mah. Thr. Ps Ganeshpeth Nagpur and Another

Nitin Shikshan Sanstha, Gondia through Secretary Shri Dayaram Dhonduji Baladhare and Others Vs State of Mah. Thr. Secretary, Govt. of Maha. School Education and Sports Dept. Mumbai and Others

Arun S/O Gulab Gawali Vs Divisional Commissioner Nagpur Division Nagpur and Another

Lok Dnyan Prasarak Sanstha, Chandrapur Thr. Its Secretary Vs State of Maha., Thr. Secretary, Medical Education and Drugs Department, Mumbai and Others

Pramod S/O Maroti Ingle Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Bittergaon Tq.Umarkhed Dist.Yavatmal and Another

Shankar Jairam Dodake Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. the Police Station Officer, Durgapur, Tq. and Dist. Chandrapur