Allowed

Kundan S/O Harishchandra Shirkhare and 5 Others v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso Frezarpur Amravati Tah. and Dist.Amravati and Another

Bombay HC20 Aug 2024APL/1061/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants sought quashing of an FIR for dacoity and criminal intimidation under BNS after taking liquor bottles worth Rs.4000 from an informant's beer bar without payment. The informant and manager filed affidavits confirming amicable settlement. The High Court quashed the FIR, imposing Rs.25,000 costs.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.600/2024 quashed; in-custody applicants Nos.2, 3 and 6 to be released if not involved in other crimes; Rs.25,000 costs payable to Vidarbha Lady Lawyers Association.

Kundan S/O Harishchandra Shirkhare and 5 Others vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:9579-DB

¶2

1 931.apl.1061.24-J.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1061 OF 2024

¶5

1.	Kundan s/o. Harishchandra Shirkhare, Aged about 23 years, Occupation – Labour, R/o. Yashodha Nagar No.2, Amravati.
2.	Golu @ Suraj S/o. Shrikrishna Raut, Aged about 23 years, Occupation – Labourer, R/o. Mahadevkhori, Amravati. (In Jail)
3.	Prajwal S/o., Ganeshrao Katagade, Aged about 25 years, Occupation – Labourer, R/o. Kalyan Nagar, Amravati. (In Jail)
4.	Sagar S/o. Subashrao Gajghate, Aged about 25 years, Occupation – Labourer, R/o. Sanjay Gandhi Nagar No.2, Amravati.
5.	Yash S/o. Late Prafulla Bhilkar, Aged Minor (17), Through Natural Guardian Mother – Anita P. Bhilkar – Major, Occ.- Labour, R/o. Chaitanya Colony, Amravati.
6.	Nikhil S/o. Dhanraj Makode, Aged about 22 years, Occupation – Labourer, R/o. Kumbharwada, Amravati. (In Jail) ...APPLICANT S ...VERSUS...
1.	State of Maharashtra, Through P. S. O. Frezarpura, Amravati, Tah. and District – Amravati.
2.	Rajkumar S/o. Chhatumal Ratnani, Aged about 67 years, Occupation – Business, R/o. Vyankatesh Colony, Near Hariganga Oil Mill, Rajapeth, Amravati, Tah. and District – Amravati. ...NON-APPLICANTS
---- Mr. Ms	------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- P. V. Navlani, Advocate for Applicants. S. S. Jachak, A.P.P. for Non-applicant/State.
Mr. -----	V. S. Uberoi, Advocate for Non-applicant No.2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶6

2 931.apl.1061.24-J.odt

¶7

CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND

¶8

MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.

¶9

DATED :- 26.08.2024

¶10

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

¶11

Heard.

¶12

ADMIT. The matter is taken up for final disposal by consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties.

¶13

This is an application seeking to quash First Information Report No.600/2024 registered with Police Station Frezarpur, District Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 310(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.) on account of settlement.

¶14

Precisely, it is the prosecution case that the informant owns a Beer Bar. On the date of occurrence, after the closure of the bar, the applicants barged into the bar, demanded liquor bottles, and on refusal, gave threats and forcibly took the liquor bottles worth Rs.4000/- without payment. Therefore, the crime has been registered for the offence of dacoity and criminal intimidation.

¶15

The informant as well as the manager Dhananjay are present before us, who have filed affidavit-in-reply stating that the matter is

¶16

3 931.apl.1061.24-J.odt

¶17

amicably settled and they do not want to prosecute further. It is informed that all the applicants are residents of the same locality and regular visitors of the bar. Out of misunderstanding, the report has been lodged. Though the offence of dacoity has been registered, however, looking to the facts of the case, it reveals that the matter only relates to non-payment of the liquor worth Rs.4000/- and giving threats. All the applicants reside in the same vicinity and thus, to maintain cordial relations, the informant party voluntarily agreed to settle the dispute. Certainly, settlement would be in the interest of both as they would maintain cordial relationship in future. It is informed that applicant Nos.2, 3 and 6 are in jail relating to this crime. Having regard to peculiarity of the fact, we deem it appropriate to quash the proceeding on account of settlement.

¶18

Learned Counsel for the applicant Mr. Navlani would submit that the applicants would deposit sum of Rs.25,000/- towards costs for rotating the police machinery. In view of the settlement, the continuation of the prosecution amounts to abuse of the process of the Court. Since, the matter is settled, the possibility of securing conviction is deem. In the circumstances, the application is allowed. We hereby quash and set aside the First Information Report No. 600/2024 registered with Police Station Frezarpur, District Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 310(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.).

¶19

4 931.apl.1061.24-J.odt

¶20

The applicants shall deposit sum of Rs.25,000/- towards costs with the Vidarbha Lady Lawyers Association within a period of one week from today.

¶21

After quashing of the First Information Report, the concerned Court shall pass necessary order of release of the applicant Nos.2, 3 and 6 if not involved in other crime.

¶22

The matter be placed on 03.09.2024 for noting compliance.

¶23

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)

¶24

RGurnule

¶25

Signed by: Mrs. R.M. MANDADE Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 28/08/2024 12:40:01

Kundan S/O Harishchandra Shirkhare and 5 Others v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso Frezarpur Amravati Tah. and Dist.Amravati and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kundan S/O Harishchandra Shirkhare and 5 Others v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso Frezarpur Amravati Tah. and Dist.Amravati and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dilip S/O. Sopan Ingle and Another. Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Malkapur Gramin Dist. Buldhana and Another.

Anup S/O Anand Roy Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Chief Secretary Ministry of Home Dep. Mantralaya Mumbai 32 and 4

Vinayak Shamrao Anole Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso, Ps, Desaiganj Tq. Desaiganj, Dist. Gadchiroli

Gaurav S/O. Narayanrao Vaidya Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps Paratwada, Tq. Achalpur, Dist. Amravati and Another

Tushar S/O Arun Bangani Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Rajapeth Tq. and Dist.Amravati and Another

Vardan Biotech Pvt. Ltd. Thr. Responsible Person Hitesh S/O. Rambhau Gantawar and Another Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its P.I. Tamgaon Ps, Dist. Buldhana. and Another