Prakash S/O. Kishanchand Jiwtani … vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police … on 14 September, 2017

1 apl478.17.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.478 OF 2017

1. Prakash s/o. Kishanchand Jiwtani,
Aged about 30 years, Occ.
Private Service.
2. Laxman w/o. Kishanchand Jiwtani,
Aged about 57 years, Occ.
Housewife.
3. Kisanchand s/o. Aachumal Jiwtani,
Aged about 60 yrs., Occ. Nil.
All Nos. 1 to 3 are r/o. Pakki Kholi,
Sindhi Camp, Akola, Tq. and Distt.
Akola. ………. APPLICANTS

// VERSUS //

1. State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
P.S. Vasant Nagar, Pusad.

2. Poonam w/o. Prakash Jiwtani,
Aged about 29 years, Occ.
Private Service, r/o. C/o.
Purshottam Aswani, Adarsh
Nagar, Pusad, Distt. Yavatmal. ………. NON-APPLICANTS

::: Uploaded on – 18/09/2017 19/09/2017 01:24:15 :::
2 apl478.17.odt

Mr.K.H.Anandani, Advocate for the Applicants.
Mr.A.M.Deshpande, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1/State.
Mr.Girish Dipwani, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK
AND
M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ.

DATED : 14th September, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per M.G.Giratkar, J) :

1. The applicants have filed the present Criminal

Application praying to quash and set aside the First Information

Report and the Charge Sheet in Crime No.3013 of 2015, Criminal

Case No.575 of 2016 and 100 of 2016 pending before the Judicial

Magistrate, First Class, Pusad and the First Information Report No.3

of 2016.

2. It is submitted that non-applicant no.2 was the wife of

applicant no.1. Due to misunderstanding, she lodged the report

against the applicants. Prima facie, the offences punishable under

Sections 498, 294, 504, 506, 323 r/w. Section 34 of the Indian Penal

Code and the offence punishable under Section 498 r/w. Section 34

::: Uploaded on – 18/09/2017 19/09/2017 01:24:15 :::
3 apl478.17.odt

of the Indian Penal Code are not made out. Therefore, it is prayed to

quash and set aside the quash and set aside the First Information

Report and the Charge Sheet in Crime No.3013 of 2015, Criminal

Case No.575 of 2016 and 100 of 2016 pending before the Judicial

Magistrate, First Class, Pusad and the First Information Report No.3

of 2016.

3. The Criminal Application is opposed by the non-

applicant no.1/State.

4. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicants and non-

applicant no.2 and also the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for

non-applicant no.1.

5. Today, the applicants and non-applicant no.2 are present

before the Court.

6. We have personally asked non-applicant no.2 about the

settlement. She has stated before us that the matter was

compromised between the husband (applicant no.1) and the wife

(non-applicant no.2). She has admitted her signature on the

::: Uploaded on – 18/09/2017 19/09/2017 01:24:15 :::
4 apl478.17.odt

Compromise deed/Sammatipatra filed at Annexure-C in this petition.

She has also stated before us that divorce is granted by the Family

Court, Akola on 5.8.2017. Now she does not want to prosecute all

the applicants.

7. The learned Counsel for the applicants and the non-

applicant no.2 have submitted before us that there is no possibility of

adducing any evidence by the complainant/non-applicant no.2

against the applicants. The learned Counsel for both the sides have

submitted that the matter is settled between the husband and the

wife. Therefore, it is prayed to quash and set aside the Charge sheet

and the Criminal case as mentioned above.

8. As per the statement made by the applicants and non-

applicant no.2 before us and the documents filed on record, it is clear

that on 21.1.2017 compromise took place between the applicant no.1

and non-applicant no.2 (husband and wife). As per the terms of

compromise, they got divorce by mutual consent from the Family Court,

Akola. Now the applicant no.1 and non-applicant no. 2 are not husband

and wife. They have settled all their disputes. There is no possibility of

applicant no.2 to adduce evidence against the applicants. There is no

::: Uploaded on – 18/09/2017 19/09/2017 01:24:15 :::
5 apl478.17.odt

possibility of any conviction of the applicants. Therefore, it will not be

proper to keep the case pending against the applicants. In view of the

law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs.

State of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, the

charge sheets/Criminal Case Nos.100/16 and 575/16 pending against

the applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 294,

323, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code are liable to be quashed

and set aside.

9. Hence, we allow the Criminal Application in terms of the

prayer clause therein and quash and set aside the First Information

Report and the Charge Sheet in Crime No.3013 of 2015, Criminal Case

No.575 of 2016 and 100 of 2016 pending before the Judicial

Magistrate, First Class, Pusad and the First Information Report No.3 of

2016. No order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE

*jaiswal

::: Uploaded on – 18/09/2017 19/09/2017 01:24:15 :::
6 apl478.17.odt

::: Uploaded on – 18/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on – 19/09/2017 01:24:15 :::

Leave a Comment

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