Allowed

Ziaullah Khana Son of Jailani Khan and 5 Other v. the State of Maharashtra P.S.O. Nandura Dist. Buldhana and Another

Bombay HC12 Nov 2024APL/1651/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench allowed a criminal application seeking to quash prosecution for offences under various IPC sections. The court quashed proceedings due to settlement between the parties, directing the applicant to deposit costs.

What did the court decide?

Criminal prosecution bearing R.C.C.No.104/2016 quashed and set aside; applicant directed to deposit Rs.10,000 towards costs.

Ziaullah Khana Son of Jailani Khan and 5 Other Vs the State… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:12421-DB

¶2

1 12-apl 1651.2024.odt

¶3

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

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1651 OF 2024

¶5

( Ziyaullah Khan s/o Jilani Khan and others vs. The State of Maharashtra and another )

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders.

¶7

Mr. Rahul Tajne, Advocate for applicants. Mr. M.K.Pathan, APP for non-applicant No.1. Mr. P.W.Mirza, Advocate for non-applicant No.2.

¶8

CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ. DATE : NOVEMBER 12, 2024

¶9

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

¶10

This is an application seeking to quash Criminal Prosecution bearing R.C.C.No.104/2016 arising out of Crime No.0289/2016 registered with Police Station Nandura, District Buldana for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, on account of settlement.

¶11

The informant has lodged report regarding the alleged occurrence of assault in which he sustained injury. It is brought to our notice that counter case was filed by rival which was settled today. The parties are related to each other and to maintain harmony they have settled the dispute.

¶12

The informant is present before us, who has filed reply stating about settlement and has no objection to quash the proceedings. Since the matter has been settled, we are inclined to exercise our inherent jurisdiction. The learned Counsel for the

¶13

2 12-apl 1651.2024.odt

¶14

applicant would submit that the applicant would deposit sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) towards costs.

¶15

In view of above, the application is allowed. We hereby quashed and set aside the Criminal Prosecution bearing R.C.C.No.104/2016 arising out of Crime No.0289/2016 registered with Police Station Nandura, District Buldana for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

The applicant shall deposit sum of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) towards costs in the Library of Government Pleader Office at Nagpur within two weeks from today.

¶17

Stand over to 27/11/2024 for noting compliance.

¶18

( ABHAY J. MANTRI, J. )

¶19

( VINAY JOSHI, J. )

¶20

KOLHE

Ziaullah Khana Son of Jailani Khan and 5 Other v. the State of Maharashtra P.S.O. Nandura Dist. Buldhana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ziaullah Khana Son of Jailani Khan and 5 Other v. the State of Maharashtra P.S.O. Nandura Dist. Buldhana 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

Similar cases

Prashant S/O Arjun Chamke Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Jaripatka Nagpur

Manish S/O Ratanlal Agrawal Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Secretary Home Dept. Mantralaya Mumbai and Another

Prakash Sahebrao Kolhe and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Mankapur Dist. Nagpur

Sadguru Bahuuddeshiya Yuwak Mandal Amravati Thorugh Presdent Shri Prabhat S/O Shamlal Jaiswal Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary, Home Department Mantralaya, Mumbai and 1

Tejrao Namdeorao Ingle Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secretary Home Dep. Mantralaya Mumbai and 2 Others

Akash Shankar Bembare and 2 Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Pso Gittikhadan Nagpur City