Disposed

Amritpal Singh Khalsa and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Mar 2024WP/618/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought directions to police to decide their applications alleging falsity in a complaint by respondent No.4, claiming they were absent from Mumbai. After their statements were recorded and the police 'filed' the complaint against them, the court found nothing survived and disposed of the petition without going into merits.

What the court decided

AI extract

Amritpal Singh Khalsa and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

WP 618-2024.doc

¶2

Digitally signed by RUPALI RUPALI RAJESH RAJESH WAKODIKAR WAKODIKAR Date: 2024.03.20 17:10:17 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 618 OF 2024

¶5

1. Amritpal Singh Khalsa

¶6

2. Satvinder Kaur Amritpal Singh ...Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. The State of Maharashtra

¶9

2. Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ambarnath

¶10

3. Deputy Commissioner of Police,

¶11

Zone – IV

¶12

4. Sanveer Kaur

¶13

5. Preet Singh Dhugga

¶14

6. Parminder Singh Dhugga ...Respondents

¶15

Mr. Amritpal Singh Khalsa, Petitioner No.1 in person, present.

¶16

Mrs. P.P.Shinde, A.P.P for the Respondent-State.

¶17

Mr. N.B.Gaikwad, PSI attached to Shivaji Nagar Police Station,
Ambarnath (E), present.

¶18

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
 MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.
 DATE : 18th MARCH, 2024

¶19

P.C.:

¶20

1. By this petition, the petitioners seek a direction to the

¶21

respondent Nos.1 to 3 to decide the petitioner’s applications dated

¶22

1/3

¶23

Wakodikar

¶24

WP 618-2024.doc

¶25

30th April, 2023 and 11th May, 2023. By the said applications, the
petitioners have placed before the Police of the Shivaji Nagar Police
Station Ambarnath(East), the falsity in the complaint, instituted by the
respondent No.4. It was the petitioner’s case, they were not present
in Mumbai at the time when the offence is alleged to have taken place,
according to the respondent No.4.

¶26

2.We had directed the petitioners to appear before the
concerned Police Station for recording of their statements.

¶27

3.Learned APP informs that the petitioners’ statements have
been recorded. Learned APP, on instructions states that the grievance
of the petitioners will not now survive, since, the Police have ‘filed’
the complaint, made by the respondent No.4, as against the
petitioners.

¶28

4.In view of the aforesaid, nothing survives for further
consideration in the aforesaid petition.

¶29

2/3

¶30

Wakodikar

¶31

WP 618-2024.doc

¶32

5. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶33

6.We make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of
the complaints filed by either of the parties, and as such keep all
contentions of all parties open.

¶34

7. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this

¶35

order.

¶36

MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶37

3/3

¶38

Wakodikar

Amritpal Singh Khalsa and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Amritpal Singh Khalsa and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Firoz Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Roshan Bhimrao Rathod Vs State of Maharashtra

Roshan Bhimrao Rathod Vs State of Maharashtra

Ajit Ashok Kurane Vs State of Maharashtra

Mohamed Tharik Tajudeen Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ajit Ashok Kurane Vs State of Maharashtra