At the discharge stage, the court must assume prosecution evidence is true and evaluate if it discloses necessary elements of the alleged offence, not the merits of the case.

JUDGMENT :

(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)

1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 26.10.2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Chandrapur and the impugned order dated 19.12.2020 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bramhapuri rejecting the discharge application.

2. Facts necessary for disposal of the application are as under :

The applicant, who is accused No.1, is the President of “The Young Engineers Education Society, Kurkheda, district Chandrapur” having various educational institutions at Bramhapuri. The said Society is having 13 acres of land in Bhetada, taluka Bramhapuri, district Chandrapur. On the said property, the above education Society runs various institutions. One Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule, was Principal of the Maharashtra Institution of Education, which is run by the above education Society, during 2010-2016. The above Society was intending to start an Engineering College at this premises in the year 2015 and said Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule was assigned to complete all formalities for preparing proposal to start the College. Said Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule did all formalities and proposal was submitted. Initially, the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) granted permission. In the year 2016, it revealed that the forged documents were submitted. Prior to that, Said Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule was removed from the services as it reveals that he has submitted forged documents with respect to his qualification and, therefore, FIR was registered at Kurkheda Police Station against said Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule under Sections 406, 417, 418, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, and 506 read with 34 of the IPC.

3. Due to grudges, said Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule made complaint against the applicant to the Sub Divisional Officer at Bramhapuri alleging that the applicant has prepared the forged documents for starting New Engineering College at Bhetada, taluka Bramhapuri, district Chandrapur. One FIR was registered against the applicant vide Crime No.335/2017 under Sections 420, 468, and 471 read with 34 of the IPC. Subsequently, the AICTE and the Government of Maharashtra withdrew the approval granted to the College. After completion of investigation, chargesheet is submitted against the applicant and other office bearers and Regular Criminal Case No.28/2018 was registered which is pending before learned JMFC at Bramhapuri. During pendency of the said case, the applicant has filed an application for discharge. Learned JMFC at Bramhapuri rejected the discharge application on 19.12.2020. The said order was challenged before the Sessions Court at Chandrapur. Learned Sessions Judge at Chandrapur also rejected the application by dismissing Criminal Revision Application No.2/2021 by order dated 26.10.2023 Hence, this application.

4. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri M.K.Pathan for the State.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is the President of the said Society. Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule was assigned to complete all formalities for preparing proposal to start the College. Said Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule did all formalities and the applicant has only submitted the proposal before the Authority. The NA order was found to be forged. In fact, the College was never started. The statements of the witnesses show that it was Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule who brought documents. Said Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule has suppressed that initially the crime was registered against him on the basis of report lodged by the applicant. While considering application under Section 156(3) of the Code, it was not brought to the notice of learned Magistrate that initially the crime was registered against Raghuvir Somaji Bawankule vide Crime No.267/2017. The direction of learned Magistrate to register the offence against the applicant was challenged before this court in Cri