Allowed

Tapan S/O Rameshkumar Jaiswal v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., Bajaj Nagar P.S.. Nagpur. and 2 Others.

Bombay HC13 Oct 2023APL/1195/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, allowed an application to quash a charge sheet filed under various IPC and Maharashtra Money-Lending Act sections. Relying on the settlement between parties regarding a commercial dispute, the court utilized inherent powers to set aside the charge sheet.

What did the court decide?

Quashed and set aside the charge sheet arising out of Crime No. 0188/2020 issued under the cited sections on account of settlement.

Tapan S/O Rameshkumar Jaiswal Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Money Laundering | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

2023:BHC-NAG:15075-DB

¶2

1 21-J-APL-1195-22.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1195 OF 2022

¶5

APPLICANT :Tapan S/o Rameshkumar Jaiswal,
Aged about 38 Yrs., Occ - Business,
R/o - Shrijee, Datey Layout,
Swawalambi Nagar, Nagpur 440002.
Mobile No. 7720045159.

¶6

V E R S U S

¶7

NON-APPLICANTS :1. The State of Maharashtra

¶8

 Through Police Station Officer,
 Bajaj Nagar Police Station,

¶9

 Nagpur.

¶10

2. The State of Maharashtra Through In-Charge, Crime Branch, Nagpur.

¶11

3. Rahul s/o Narendranath Dalvi,
 Aged about 53 Yrs., R/o - Pandey
 Layout, Khamla, Nagpur.

¶12

Shr D. V. Chauhan, Advocate for applicant.

¶13

Shri S. S. Doifode, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent
Nos.1 & 2.

¶14

Shri Amol Jaltare, Advocate for respondent No.3.

¶15

CORAM:-VINAY JOSHI AND
VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.
DATED : 13/10/2023.

¶16

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER VINAY JOSHI, J.) :

¶17

1.Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned

¶18

counsel appearing for the parties.

¶19

2 21-J-APL-1195-22.doc

¶20

2.This is an application seeking to quash charge sheet
arising out of Crime No.0188/2020 for the offences punishable
under Sections 294, 384, 386, 465, 468, 471 and 506 r/w Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 39, 43, 44, 45 and 46 of
the Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014 on
account of settlement.

¶21

3.Though police have invoked various penal provisions,
however, it reveals that out of monetary transaction, report has
been lodged. Both parties are having long standing financial
relations. With the aid and intervention of community mediator,
the parties have settled the dispute. The informant has filed
affidavit / reply stating that the matter has been settled and he
does not want to prosecute the case. The informant is present
before us and is identified by Counsel Shri Amol Jaltare.

¶22

4.On our query, informant has reiterated that the matter
is settled. He does not want to prosecute further. At this juncture,
we have brought to the notice that the police are required to
utilise public time to investigate and file charge sheet.

¶23

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has fairly submitted that the applicant will deposit sum of Rs.50,000/- in Police Welfare Fund, Nagpur within two weeks from today towards costs.

¶24

3 21-J-APL-1195-22.doc

¶25

6.The alleged offence is a commercial private dispute,
which cannot be termed as heinous or anti-social. Though charge
sheet is filed, yet charges have not been framed. Having regard to
the nature of transaction and the settlement arrived at in between
the parties, we deem it appropriate to invoke inherent powers.

¶26

7.In view of above, application is allowed. We hereby
quash and set aside the charge sheet arising out of Crime
No.0188/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 294,
384, 386, 465, 468, 471 and 506 r/w Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code and Sections 39, 43, 44, 45 and 46 of the Maharashtra
Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014 on account of settlement
which is numbered as R.C.C. No.3868/2021 pending on the file of
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur to the extent of applicant.

¶27

8. The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶28

9.The matter be placed on 10/11/2023 for noting
compliance.

¶29

[VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J.] [VINAY JOSHI, J.]

¶30

Choulwar

Tapan S/O Rameshkumar Jaiswal v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., Bajaj Nagar P.S.. Nagpur. and 2 Others.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tapan S/O Rameshkumar Jaiswal v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., Bajaj Nagar P.S.. Nagpur. and 2 Others.

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

Mukund S/O Jagannathrao Borade Vs the State of Mha. Thr. Pso Wardha City Tah. and Dist.Wardha

Ravindra Gulabrao Bhende and Another. Vs State of Maht. Pso, Ramnagar, Dist. Wardha and Another.

Kishor S/O. Madhukarrao Panchgade Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps Umred, Dist. Nagpur Gramin and Another.

Amardeep S/O. Nanaji Dhanvijay Vs State of Mah. Thr. Its Pso, Ps Sonegaon, Nagpur Dist. Nagpur and Others

Rahul S/O Babanrao Bhad Vs State of Mah. Thr. Its Secretary Dep. of Home Mantralaya Mumbai 32 and Another

Ajeet Gunwant Parse Thr. Poa Holder Shubhada W/O. Gunwant Parse (I.E Applicant No. 3) and Others Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Commissioner of Police, Nagpur City Nagpur Tah. and Dist. Nagpur and Others