Allowed

Abhishek Manik Chavan v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Feb 2023WP/480/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Mumbai allowed a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR against the petitioner, a minor accused, citing amicable settlement, supportive affidavit from the complainant, and humanitarian grounds related to the petitioner's youth and lack of maturity, subject to cost deposit.

What did the court decide?

FIR and subsequent proceedings were quashed against the petitioner only, subject to deposit of Rs. 50,000/- in two designated charitable trusts.

Abhishek Manik Chavan Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

907-WP-480-2022.doc

¶2

Shailaja

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.480 OF 2022

¶4

Abhishek Manik Chavan]Petitioner
vs.
1. The State of Maharashtra]
2. Vipul Arun Randeri]Respondents
a/w
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1277 OF 2022
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.480 OF 2022
Abhishek Manik Chavan]Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
Abhishek Manik Chavan]Petitioner
vs.
1. The State of Maharashtra]
2. Vipul Arun Randeri]
3. The Union of India ]Respondents
…..
Mr. Sagar Talekar, for Petitioner.
Ms. P.P. Shinde, A.P.P, for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr. Ankit Lohia a/w Ms. Garima Mehrotra, for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Dashrath Dube, for Union of India in I.A. No.277 of 2022.

¶5

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
 PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.J.

¶6

 DATE : 22nd February, 2023.

¶7

1 of 9

¶8

Digitally signed by SHAILAJA SHRIKANT HALKUDE Date: 2023.03.02 18:18:59 +0530

¶9

SHAILAJA SHRIKANT HALKUDE

¶10

907-WP-480-2022.doc

¶11

ORDER: [Per Prithviraj K. Chavan, J.]

¶12

1. Heard.

¶13

2. Rule.

¶14

3. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶15

4. Learned A.P.P waives notice on behalf of respondent No.1State and Mr. Lohia, learned Counsel waives notice on behalf of respondent No.2.

¶16

5.By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
and under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(for short "Cr. P.C"), the petitioner seeks quashing of the First
Information Report (for short "F.I.R") registered vide C.R. No.482
of 2017 with Shahapur Police Station, District. Thane, for the
alleged offences punishable under sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471,
120-B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "I.P.C") and
consequently, the proceeding pending before the Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Shahapur being Criminal Case No.139 of 2018.

¶17

2 of 9

¶18

907-WP-480-2022.doc

¶19

Quashing is sought on the premise that the parties have amicably
settled their dispute.

¶20

6. Facts in brief, are as under.

¶21

7.Petitioner is one of the six accused. He is the son of original

¶22

accused No.3- Manik Chavan. Respondent No.2 is the first
informant. It is alleged that the petitioner along with rest of the
accused executed sale deed in respect of land belonging to the
respondent No.2 by producing an impostor before the Sub
Registrar, Shahapur, Thane.

¶23

8.Respondent No.2 is the owner of the land bearing Survey
No.19/5 having area 1.47 R situate at Sarangpuri, Taluka Shahapur.
It is alleged that an area of 0.97.0 was transferred in the name of
one Girish Ananta Andade for a consideration of Rs.20,00,000/-
vide sale deed No.2934 of 2017 dated 28th March, 2017 and an
area of 0.50.0 was transferred in the name of Abhishek Manik
Chavan (petitioner) for a consideration of Rs.5,00,000/- vide sale
deed No.2937 of 2017 dated 28th March, 2017 from the said
survey No.19/5. It is alleged that the petitioner, in collusion with

¶24

3 of 9

¶25

907-WP-480-2022.doc

¶26

rest of the accused, posed himself as a complainant by creating false
documents in the name of the respondent No.2 before the Sub
Registrar, Shahapur. Accordingly, a report came to be lodged with
Shahapur Police Station, Thane, as above and above offences came
to be registered.

¶27

9.It is pertinent to note that the respondent No.2 is an old man
residing at Mumbai and, therefore, was unaware about the said
fraudulent transfer of his land. He came to know about the same
on 10th August, 2017 when persons namely Mangesh Kamlakar
Adhikari and Narayan Mukund Vide, who are the residents of
Sarangpuri, informed him about sale of his land bearing Survey
No.19/5.

¶28

10.It is the contention of the petitioner that he was residing at
Nashik along with his mother, whereas, his father was posted as a
Range Forest Officer at Dhasai, Taluka Shahapur. The petitioner
contends that on 15th September, 2017 he was out of station. He
came to know about the said transaction when his mother had
shown him a letter dated 19th September, 2017 issued by P.I. of
Shahapur Police Station. It is the contention of the petitioner that

¶29

4 of 9

¶30

907-WP-480-2022.doc

¶31

he has been falsely implicated by the respondent No.2 as he was not
at all involved in preparation of alleged bogus voting card and
Aadhar Card. He was not responsible for presenting an impostor
before the Sub-Registrar, Shahapur to execute the sale deed in
question. The petitioner claims to be a student of final year
Engineering. As such, the petitioner claims innocence.

¶32

11.The respondent No.2-original complainant has sworn an
affidavit dated 21st February, 2023, duly notarized before the
Notary. It is apposite to extract paragraphs 11 and 12 of the
Affidavit, which are self-explanatory.

¶33

"11. I say and submit that I am a senior
citizen aged 67 years having undergone
heart surgery in December, 2020. I say
that as a diligent citizen I have fulfilled my
duty to register the F.I.R for the police to
take cognizance of the offence and that the
Respondent No.1 is investigating the
matter and they have to file their
investigation report. Thus, I do not wish
to associate myself with the case any
further.

¶34

12.In view of the young age of the
Petitioner and on account of the fact that
the Petitioner is a student, on humanitarian
grounds alone I have no objection if the
Petition alone is relieved from the said

¶35

5 of 9

¶36

907-WP-480-2022.doc

¶37

F.I.R, if this Hon'ble Court considers it fit
and proper. Needless to say that I continue
to maintain that my complaint as filed was
bona -fide and no allegation ought to be
made against me by the Petitioner or any
other Accused or the Authorities that I had
filed a wrongful complaint".

¶38

In view of the said affidavit, the respondent No.2, only on the
humanitarian ground alone, appears to have given his no objection
for quashing of the F.I.R only qua the petitioner. It is clear that the
respondent No.2 maintains that he wishes to continue as
complainant against rest of the accused.

¶39

12.The petitioner has also filed his affidavit dated 22nd February,
2023 duly notarized before the Notary, wherein he states that at the
time of the alleged incident, he was 20 years old and studying
diploma course in Civil Engineering. He has annexed photostat
copies of his birth certificate as well as his statement of marks in the
Engineering College. He has also annexed photostat copy of his
Aadhar Card, duly attested by him.

¶40

13.Respondent No.2 as well as the petitioner are present before
us. On being questioned, respondent No.2 reiterates what is stated

¶41

6 of 9

¶42

907-WP-480-2022.doc

¶43

by him in his affidavit. Learned Counsel for the respondent No.2
has identified the respondent No.2. Learned Counsel has also
tendered a photo copy of the Aadhar Card of the respondent No.2,
duly attested by him. The same is taken on record and the original
Aadhar Card is verified by the learned A.P.P..

¶44

14.Considering the nature of dispute, the amicable settlement
between the parties, affidavit of the respondent No.2 and having
regard to the judicial pronouncements of the Apex Court in the case
of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr.1and Narinder Singh &
Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr.2, there is no impediment in allowing
the petition.

¶45

15. The petition is accordingly allowed and the FIR bearing C.R.
482 of 2017 registered with Shahapur Police Station, District
Thane and consequently, the proceeding pending before the Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Shahapur being Criminal Case No.139 of
2018, are quashed and set aside, only against the petitioner, subject
to the petitioner depositing costs of Rs.50,000/-. Out of
Rs.50,000/-, Rs. 25,000/- to be deposited with "Sanvedana

¶46

1 (2012) 10 SCC 303

¶47

2 (2014) 6 SCC 466

¶48

7 of 9

¶49

907-WP-480-2022.doc

¶50

Charitable Trust, Sangli". Bank details of which are as under:

¶51

`Account Name`	`Sanvedana Charitable Trust,` `Sangli`
`Bank Name`	`The Karad Urban Co-op. Bank` `Limited, Karad`
`Account Number`	`10 33 01 61 87 721`
`IFSC CODE NUMBER`	`KUCB0488033`

¶52

and Rs. 25,000/- to be deposited with "Jeevan Sandhya Mangalya

¶53

Sansthan". Bank details of which are as under;

¶54

`Name of Account`	`Jeevan Sandhya Mangalya` `Sansthan`
`Account Number`	`60134381699`
`Type of Account`	`Saving`
`Name of Bank`	`Bank of Maharashtra`
`Branch`	`Padgha`
`IFSC Code`	`MAHB0000189`
`PAN NUMBER`	`AATJ2015Q`

¶55

The said costs to be deposited within four weeks from today.

¶56

16.We make it clear that the petitioner's father who is also an
accused in the said crime shall not seek parity in future. We are
inclined to quash the F.I.R qua the petitioner looking to the young
age and his future prospects. It appears that he was not that mature
to understand the gravity of the offence alleged to have been
committed. Even the respondent No.2 has taken a sympathetic
approach in respect of the petitioner.

¶57

8 of 9

¶58

907-WP-480-2022.doc

¶59

17.As such, rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. Petition
is disposed of accordingly.

¶60

18.Matter be listed for recording compliance regarding deposit
of costs, on 29th March, 2023.

¶61

19.In view the order passed in the aforesaid criminal writ
petition, nothing survives for consideration in the Interim
Application. Hence, Interim Application is disposed of.

¶62

20. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶63

[PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.] [REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.]

¶64

9 of 9

Abhishek Manik Chavan v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek Manik Chavan v. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Rajaram Thakare and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Anil Jayram Raut Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Rajendra Suresh Ahire and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ganesh Hanumant Ghuge Vs State of Maharashtra

Abhishek Manik Chavan Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shivkumar Ramesh Jaiswal and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.