Allowed

Avinash Balkrushna Bansod v. the State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps, Awadhutwadi, Dist. Yavatmal and Another.

Bombay HC1 Oct 2024APL/227/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash an FIR for cheating under Sections 420/34 IPC. The informant had settled the dispute and prosecution against the principal accused was already quashed. Finding the matter settled with all accused, the Court quashed the FIR against all, including the applicant.

What did the court decide?

FIR Crime No.1097 of 2022 quashed for all accused including applicant

Avinash Balkrushna Bansod Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 928.apl.227.2023

¶2

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

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.227 OF 2023

¶4

Avinash Balkrushna Bansod ..vs..

¶5

State of Maharashtra and anr.

¶6

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

Court's or Judge's orders

¶9

¶10

Shri M.N. Ali, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs. Deshmukh, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶11

CORAM: VINAY JOSHI AND MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 01/10/2024.

¶12

Though the informant has been served, he is

¶13

absent.

¶14

Heard.

¶15

This is an application seeking to quash the First Information Report bearing Crime No.1097 of 2022 registered with the Awdhootwadi Police Station, District Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

Learned Counsel for the applicant would initially submit that the informant has settled the dispute with principal accused i.e. Dnyaneshwar Chate. On the basis of said settlement, the criminal prosecution against the Dnyaneshwar has been quashed by this Court in Criminal Application (APL) No.253/2023 vide judgment and order dated 20.09.2023. He would submit that since the matter has already been settled, there is no propriety in continuing the prosecution against the present applicant. Learned Counsel for the applicant also took us through

¶17

2 928.apl.227.2023

¶18

the contents of FIR to impress that the principal allegations are against co-accused Dnyaneshwar of receipt of huge sum. It is pointed out that the informant has only handed over Rs.1 lakh to the applicant, which has already been transferred. In this regard, he has produced bank statement to show that the amount has been paid to the principal accused. It is apparent that entire allegations are against the principal accused Dnyaneshwar. It appears that the role of the present applicant is to introduce principal accused, who has received the huge amount. We have called the record of Criminal Application No.253/2023 and gone through the consent affidavit filed by the informant in said application. Particularly, paragraph 5 of the said affidavit indicates that the informant has admitted that he has received entire amount and he has no grievance against the accused mentioned in the above FIR. It is evident that the matter has been settled with all accused in entirety.

¶19

It was a commercial dispute, which has been settled between the parties. Already the informant has settled and the proceedings as against the principal accused has been quashed. In the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to quash the criminal prosecution not only against the applicant but rest all the accused, who are also falling in the same line.

¶20

In view of the above, the application is allowed. We hereby quash and set aside the First Information Report bearing Crime No.1097 of 2022 registered with the Awdhootwadi Police Station, District Yavatmal for

¶21

3 928.apl.227.2023

¶22

the offence punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code as regards to all the accused including the present applicant.

¶23

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶24

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

¶25

Trupti

Avinash Balkrushna Bansod v. the State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps, Awadhutwadi, Dist. Yavatmal and Another.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avinash Balkrushna Bansod v. the State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps, Awadhutwadi, Dist. Yavatmal 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

Smt. Rupali Bhrambe W/O Kalpesh Bharambe and Another Vs the State O Maharashtra Thr. Director General of Police Mah. and 4 Others

Murlidhar S. Choudhary Thr. Constituted Attorney Uttam S/O Gulabchand Keshyap and Others Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mumbai and Others

Badadala Ramesh Ranga Reddy Vs the State of Mah., Thr. Police Station Officer Ajani Nagpur

Union of India, Central Rly. Gen. Manager, Cst Mumbai Thr Dy Chief Engineer, Central Rly. Const. Ng Vs Harichand Jagannath Khandelwal (Died) Thr. Lrs. Smt. Shantabai Wd/O Harichand Khandelwal and Others

Ashok S/O Panjumal Chelani vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Additional Chief Secretary Home Dep. (Spl). and 2 Others

Union of India, Central Rly. Gen. Manager, Cst Mumbai Thr Dy Chief Engineer, Central Rly. Const. Ng Vs Harichand Jagannath Khandelwal (Died) Thr. Lrs. Smt. Shantibai Wd/O Harichand Khandelwal and Others