The main legal point established in the judgment is that the continuation of a prosecution would amount to an abuse of process of court if the basic ingredients of the alleged offences are altogether absent.

JUDGMENT :

AMIT B. BORKAR, J.

This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) lays challenge to the registration of First Information Report (FIR) dated 20-3-2013 registered at City Police Station, Chandrapur, vide Crime No.77/2014 for offences punishable under Sections 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The applicant being aggrieved by continuation of the above proceedings, prays for quashing thereof.

2. The prefatory facts would be necessary to comprehend better the issues involved and rival contentions :-

The case of the applicant in substance is that, the applicant was working as Shop Inspector with Municipal Council, Chandrapur. On 20-3-2014, the complainant lodged a report with the non-applicant No.1 Police Station alleging that Shop No.81 of Municipal Council was leased out to her uncle Muralidhar Shukla and he was carrying out his business in the name of ‘Asha Watch Company’ and after his death, she entrusted the affairs of said shop to Sushil Tiwari. One Aadesh Tiwari had applied for the issuance of license of the shop and the applicant in connivance with Aadesh issued license in his name. It is alleged that license was issued in the name of Aadesh Tiwari as Proprietor of ‘Asha Watch Company’ by intentionally changing earlier license of ‘Asha Watch Company’. Though the applicant is legal representative of the owner of the said shop, Adesh Tiwari is illegally using the said shop. On 26-12-2008, Aadesh Tiwari in connivance with the applicant prepared forged license in the name of Aadesh Tiwari as owner of the said shop by falsely claiming that original license has been lost. Therefore, the non-applicant No. 2 filed FIR with the non-applicant No. 1 bearing Crime No. 77/2014 on 20-3-2014.

3. The applicant has therefore, filed the present application invoking power of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.. In substance, the case of the applicant is that registration of the FIR against the applicant is abuse of process of Court. The change in register took place on 14-2-2003 by earlier Shop Inspector and it bears signature of the then Shop Inspector. In the year 2003, the applicant was not in charge of the said post. The applicant has continued earlier notings and therefore, no forgery is committed by the applicant.

4. The non-applicant No.1 filed reply and pointed out that there is allegation of collusion with Aadesh Tiwari by the applicant. He deleted name of the original shop owner and the name of Aadesh Tiwari was shown as proprietor in the license issued under the Shop and Establishment Act for the said shop. It is further stated that there is prima facie material showing involvement of the present applicant in the crime and therefore, prayed for rejection of the application.

5. The Non-applicant No.2 filed her reply and stated that Aadesh Tiwari in collusion with his brother Sushil Tiwari applied for getting shop establishment license with intention to grab the shop without taking consent of the applicant. The name of Aadesh Tiwari has been entered without considering objection of the applicant and without following procedure contemplated by the law. Therefore, non-applicant No. 2 prayed for rejection of application.

6. We have heard Shri A.S. Mardikar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Sumeet Joshi, learned Advocate and Shri S. S. Doifode, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Mrs. S.P. Giratkar, learned Advocate for the non-applicant No.2.

7. Shri A.S. Mardikar, learned Senior Advocate alongwith Shri Sumeet Joshi, learned Advocate for the applicant, with reference to the contents of FIR forcefully urged that the allegations made in the FIR, even if, they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not primafacie constitute any offence nor make out a case against the accused. He submitted that the applicant has merely renewed name of Aadesh Tiwari, which was in existence on the record of Municipal Council since 2003. Therefore, he prayed for qu