Allowed

Raju S/O. Balaji Chhannawar and Others v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps Hudkeshwar, Nagpur and 2 Others

Bombay HC23 Oct 2024APL/437/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, allowed an application to quash an FIR under Section 304 Part-II IPC. The case involved a construction labourer's death due to a fall. The court observed the incident was an accident resulting in compensation and a settlement, deeming continued prosecution an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

First Information Report in Crime No.967/2023 registered with Hudkeshwar Police Station, Nagpur City is quashed and set aside. Applicants are directed to deposit Rs.50,000 towards costs.

Raju S/O. Balaji Chhannawar and Others Vs State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 apl437.24

¶2

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

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 437 OF 2024

¶4

( Raju s/o Balaji Chhannawar and others ..vs.. State of Maharashtra, through PSO, PS Hudkeshwar, Nagpur and others )

¶5

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

¶6

- - - - Mr. A.V. Band, Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. N. Joshi, Addl.P.P. for non-applicant No.1/State, Ms. Kirti Deshpande, Counsel for non-applicant No.3.

¶7

CORAM : VINAY JOSHI &

ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

DATE : 23-10-2024

Heard.

This is an application seeking to quash First Information Report in Crime No.967/2023 registered with Hudkeshwar Police Station, Nagpur City for offence punishable under Section 304 Part-II of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, on account of settlement. Deceased Dinesh was construction labour. On the date of occurrence, he was doing labour work on 8^th floor in the under construction building. The applicants are Directors of the developers who were incharge of the construction. While doing labour work, by loss of balance, Dinesh fell from 8^th Floor and died. The police have enquired with all the legal heirs of deceased, but they declined to come forward to lodge report. Facing non co-operation from the legal heirs, Police Sub-Inspector has lodged report on behalf of the State.

¶12

2 apl437.24

¶13

It was alleged that the builder has not provided safety measures to the labours and thus his knowledge can be construed that by such act death may be caused. Due to intervention of some middlemen, the matter has been settled in between the applicants and legal heirs of deceased Dinesh. The applicants have agreed and paid sum of Rs.5,00,000/(Rupees Five Lakhs) by cheque to the widow. On account of settlement, respondent No.3 i.e. widow has filed reply stating settlement, receipt of sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) and her no objection to quash the proceedings. Deceased Dinesh left behind widow, son Vedant, daughter Saloni and mother Kamal. Today widow and son Vedant are present before us who stated about settlement and no objection. Widow has stated that her daughter Saloni has also no objection to quash the proceedings. It is informed that mother Kamal was not staying with the family since last fifteen years and thus she has no interest. Moreover, it is revealed from the First Information Report itself that when police enquired, mother Kamal showed no interest in coming forward to lodge report. As mother was not staying with deceased nor dependents, the affected party would be widow and her two children. The applicants have already compensated them. Since the matter has been settled, there is no purpose in continuing the prosecution.

¶14

The applicants’ learned Counsel made a statement that the applicants would deposit sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) towards costs in rotating police machinery.

¶15

3 apl437.24

¶16

It reveals that a labour fall down while working, resulting into death. There was no intention on the part of the informant but it is a matter of negligence. The offence cannot be termed as heinous or antisocial in nature. Since the matter is settled, continuation of prosecution amounts to abuse of process of the court.

¶17

In view of above, the application is allowed. We hereby quash and set aside the First Information Report in Crime No.967/2023 registered with Hudkeshwar Police Station, Nagpur City for offence punishable under Section 304(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶18

The applicants shall deposit sum of Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand) to the High Court Bar Library, Nagpur within one week.

¶19

Stand over on 11-11-2024 for reporting compliance.

¶20

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)

¶21

adgokar

Raju S/O. Balaji Chhannawar and Others v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps Hudkeshwar, Nagpur and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju S/O. Balaji Chhannawar and Others v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps Hudkeshwar, 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

Sameer S/O. Vilas Bramhankar Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps Ramnagar Dist. Wardha and Others

Rajesh S/O Tarachand Marbate Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Tiroda, Gondia

Bhujang Zintu Kannake Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Pombhurna Tq. Pombhurna Dist. Chandrapur

Rahul Dagdu Shirsat Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secretary Home Dept. Mumbai and Another.

Devanand S/O Sukhdev Gavai and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Pso Pinjar Ps Taluka Akola

Yogesh S/O. Pralhad Wajpe (Uncle in Laws) and Others Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps Mangrul Pir, Dist. Washim and Another.