A CPL under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR alleging assault on police was rejected. The High Court held that the FIR and police reply prima facie fulfilled essential ingredients, warranting a full trial instead of quashing.
Application rejected and disposed of; Rule stands discharged.
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.
Judgment
apl362.19 3
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.362 OF 2019
Arun s/o Khushalrao Lad,
Aged about years, occupation
private, r/o Khaparkhed Lad, taluka
Lonar, district Buldhana. ….. Applicant.
:: V E R S U S ::
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station
Officer, Police Station Bibi,
Taluka Lonar, district Buldhana.
2. Bhanudas Bhagwan
Mahadik, aged about 53
years, occupation service, r/o
Police Station, Bibi, Police
Station, Buldana. ….. Non-applicants.
===================================
Shri S.Andhare, Adv. h/f Shri A.V.Band, Counsel for the applicant.
Shri S.M.Ghodeswar, Addl.P.P. for the State.
===================================
CORAM : V.M.DESHPANDE & AMIT B.BORKAR, JJ.
DATE: APRIL 01, 2022
ORAL JUDGMENT(Per : Amit B.Borkar, J.)
1. Heard Advocate Shri S.Andhare h/f learned counsel Shri
A.V.Band for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri
S.M.Ghodeswar for the State. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for parties.
2. By the present application, under Section 482 of the
Criminal Procedure Code, the applicant challenges registration of First
.....2/-
2
Judgment
apl362.19 3
Information Report No.211/2018 dated 2.12.2018 registered with
Police Station Bibi, tahsil Lonar, district Buldhana for offences
punishable under Sections 353, 379, and 506 read with Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. The First Information Report came to be registered against
the applicant with allegations that while complainant Assistant Police
Sub Inspector Bhanudas Mahadik was on duty, he received an
information that illegal sand transportation was carried in a tractor to
Chickhla Kakad. Therefore, he along with a police constable went to the
spot. He stopped the tractor and enquired driver of the tractor about
royalty pass for transporting the sand in the tractor. At that time, the
applicant came there on his motorcycle and asked the complainant as to
whether the complainant knows him and why he stopped the said
tractor. In response thereto, the complainant told the applicant that
since the sand is being transported illegally in the tractor, action needs
to be taken. The applicant, thereafter, misbehaved with the
complainant and manhandled the police constable. It is alleged that the
the applicant asked the driver of the tractor to flee away from the spot.
Thereafter, the complainant lodged the First Information Report.
Hence, the present application challenging the First
.....3/-
Judgment
apl362.19 3
3
Information Report.
4. This Court (Coram : Z.A.Haq and Vinay Joshi, JJ.) on
8.4.2019, issued Noticed to non-applicants. In response to the Notice
issued, non-applicant No.1/State filed its reply stating in it that during
course of investigation medical examination of injured police constable
was conducted and injury certificate is also placed on record.
Investigating Officer recorded statement under Section 27 of the
Evidence Act and seized the motorcycle of the applicant. The tractor
transporting the sand illegally were also seized.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there is
no allegation of criminal force being used by the applicant on the
complainant and, therefore, essential ingredients of offences alleged
against the applicant are not fulfilled. He submitted that the applicant is
working as a Lecturer and the tractor is not owned by the applicant.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
supported the registration of the First Information Report and the said is
also stated in the Reply on behalf of Investigating Officer.
7. Having carefully considered allegations in the First
Information Report and reply on behalf of Investigating Officer, in our
.....4/-
4
Judgment
apl362.19 3
opinion allegations in the First Information Report and contents in the
reply prima facie fulfill essential ingredients of offences alleged against
the applicant. Prima facie, it appears that the police constable was
injured in the scuffle. In this view of the matter, investigating agency
needs to be given an opportunity to prove its case during trial.
8. At this stage, we are not going into correctness or
otherwise allegations made against the applicant. There is no merit in
the application and, therefore, the applicant is rejected and disposed of.
The Rule stands discharged.
9. Needless to mention that interim order stands vacated.
JUDGE JUDGE
Digitally !! BRW !! signed by BHUSHAN BHUSHAN RANA RANA WANKHEDE WANKHEDE Date: 2022.04.01 18:49:25 +0530
...../-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 482 CrPC application to quash FIR for obstruction of duty and assault should be allowed.
Whether prima facie ingredients for offences under Sections 353, 379, 506 of IPC are fulfilled based on FIR and police reply.
Whether the Cri Mis (no motion made)?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Arun s/o Khushalrao Lad
The State of Maharashtra
Bhanudas Bhagwan Mahadik
V.M.Deshpande
Amit B.Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court