Allowed

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

Bombay HC30 Sept 2024APL/833/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought quashing of chargesheet in a Section 420 IPC cheating case after settlement with informant, who gave affidavit and no objection. Court quashed chargesheet as continuing prosecution would abuse process, subject to applicant depositing Rs.10,000 costs.

What did the court decide?

Chargesheet (R.C.C. No.1082/2021) from Crime No.0355/2019 quashed on settlement; Rs.10,000 costs to be deposited with High Court Bar Association, Nagpur within two weeks.

Badadala Ramesh Ranga Reddy Vs the State of Mah., Thr… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:11055-DB

¶2

1 azpl833.2019

¶3

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

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.833/2019

¶5

(Badadala Ramesh Ranga Reddy Vs. The State of Maharashtra and another)

¶6

¶7

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

¶8

¶9

Mr. M.P. Kariya, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. M.H. Deshmukh, A.P.P. for non-applicant No.1/State. Mr. A.D. Sonak, Advocate for non-applicant No.2.

¶10

CORAM: VINAY JOSHI & MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATED: 30.9.2024.

¶11

Heard.

¶12

This is an application seeking to quash chargesheet (R.C.C. No.1082/2021) arising out of Crime No.0355/2019 registered by non-applicant No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code on account of settlement.

¶13

It is informant’s case that out of business transaction the applicant had cheated him for sum of Rs.14,00,000/-. The investigation is complete and chargesheet has been filed. The informant has also filed a private complaint against the applicant in terms of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act pertaining to the said amount. In the said proceedings, the trial Court recorded conviction against the applicant’s wife. The matter was carried in first appeal wherein the parties have arrived on the settlement. It was decided that the informant would cooperate for withdrawal of prosecution on account of settlement.

¶14

The informant is present before us who is identified by his Advocate Mr. A.D. Sonak. The informant has stated about settlement and his no objection to quash the

¶15

2 azpl833.2019

¶16

said proceedings. He has also filed affidavit-in-reply wherein he reiterated about the settlement. It was a private monetary transaction which resulted into filing a police report. Since the parties have amicably settled the matter, the continuation of prosecution would amount to abuse of process of Court. Though chargesheet has been filed, however, charges are not been framed. The applicant expressed his willingness to deposit Rs.10,000/- towards costs.

¶17

In view of above, application is allowed.

¶18

We hereby quash and set aside chargesheet (R.C.C. No.1082/2021) arising out of Crime No.0355/2019 registered by non-applicant No.1 for the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code on account of settlement. 7. Applicant shall deposit sum of Rs.10,000/- with the High Court Bar Association, Nagpur within two weeks.

¶19

Stand over to 15.10.2024 for noting compliance.

¶20

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

¶21

Tambaskar.

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Mohammed Alik Shaikh S/O Alam Sher C/9171 Vs Superintendent Nagpur Central Prison, Wardha Road, Nagpur and Another

Virendra Motilal Rathod Vs State of Maharashtra through the Superintendent Central Priison Nagpur and Another

Mahesh Chudamal Pati vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O., P.S. Kamptee, Dis.Nagpur and Another

Aatish @ Langadu S/O Dinesh Yadav Vs the State of Maharashtra through Pso Ps Kanhan Dist Nagpur

Smt. Sunita Kishor Bulkar@ Sunita Dipak Awale Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. A.C.P. Sadar,P.S.O., Mankapur, Nagpur

Subhash S/O Ramdas Gawai Vs State of Mha. Thr. Its Secretary Home Dep. Mantralaya Mumbai 32 and 2 Others