Shamsundar S/O Ramprasad Wayal … vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 7 July, 2017

1 APPLN216.2017

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

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 216 OF 2017

[1] Shamsundar S/o Ramprasad Wayal,
Age : 31 years, Occu. Agriculture,
R/o. Pangri (Bk.), Tq. Mantha,
Dist. Jalna.

[2] Satish S/o Ramprasad Wayal,
Age : 29 years, Occu. Service as
a Police Sub-Inspector,
R/o. Building No. 3, Flat No. 603,
Shrikrishna Garden, MIDC Road,
Meera Road (East),
Mumbai-401 107.

[3] Shobha W/o Ramprasad Wayal,
Age : 55 years, Occu. Nil,
R/o. Pangri (Bk.), Tq. Mantha,
Dist. Jalna. Applicants…

Versus

1] The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station, Chawni,
(Cantonment), Aurangabad,
Tq. Dist. Aurangabad.

::: Uploaded on – 10/07/2017 13/07/2017 00:22:32 :::
2 APPLN216.2017

2] Rekha Shamsundar Wayal,
Age : 28 years, Occu. Household,
R/o. At present Old Bhavsingpura,
Aurangabad Cantonment, Chawani,
Aurangabad. Respondents…

……….
Mr Shrikant G. Kawade, Advocate for the applicants
Mr M. M. Nerlikar, APP for respondent/State
………….

CORAM : R. M. BORDE
A. M. DHAVALE, JJ.

DATE : 07TH JULY, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per R. M. Borde, J.) :-

. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with

the consent of the parties and taken up for final disposal at admission

stage.

2. The applicants are praying for quashment of the criminal

proceedings initiated in pursuance to lodging of First Information

Report bearing No. 0476/2016 on 02.12.2016 with Police Station,

Chawni (Cantonment), Aurangabad for the offences punishable

u/s 498A, 504, 323 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

::: Uploaded on – 10/07/2017 13/07/2017 00:22:32 :::

3 APPLN216.2017

3. Applicant No. 1 is the husband of respondent No. 2

whereas; applicant No. 3 is the mother-in-law of respondent No. 2.

READ  Mr J S Chandrasekaran vs State Of Karnataka on 6 April, 2017

Applicant No. 2 is the brother of applicant No. 1 and stated to be

employed in Police Department and has moved out of the village

since 2007 onwards. The applicants have produced record before

this Court demonstrating that applicant No. 2 was initially appointed

as Assistant Teacher in the year 2007 and was away from his village

Pangri (Bk.). It is further pointed out that, applicant No. 2 has

cleared the examination conducted by Maharashtra Public Service

Commission for the post of PSI. After his selection, he was inducted

in employment in Police Department as a Police Sub-Inspector in the

year 2012. The applicant No. 2 is functioning in the Police

Department since 2012 and is away from village.

4. The allegations in respect of ill-treatment levelled against

applicant No. 2 at its face value cannot be taken to be true. So far as

applicant No. 1/husband and applicant No. 3/mother-in-law are

concerned, according to us, it would be appropriate to allow the

proceedings to proceed against them.

5. For the reasons recorded above, Criminal Application

stands allowed to the extent of applicant No. 2 – Satish Ramprasad

::: Uploaded on – 10/07/2017 13/07/2017 00:22:32 :::
4 APPLN216.2017

Wayal. The criminal proceedings initiated against applicant No. 2 in

pursuance to lodging of First Information Report bearing No.

0476/2016 on 02.12.2016 with Police Station, Chawni

(Cantonment), Aurangabad for the offences punishable u/s 498A,

504, 323 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, stand quashed.

6. Criminal Application to the extent of applicant No. 1 and

applicant No. 3 stands dismissed.

READ  Smt. Rinku Karmakar vs Uday Karmakar on 25 April, 2017

7. Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms.

[ A. M. DHAVALE ] [ R. M. BORDE ]
JUDGE JUDGE

sgp

::: Uploaded on – 10/07/2017 13/07/2017 00:22:32 :::

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *