IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A.S.GADKARI, RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE
Subhash Kantilal Pawar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and with the consent of learned Advocates for the respective parties, taken up for final hearing.
2. By way of this Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner seeks to quash and set aside C.R.No.1256 of 2019 filed with Mhalunge Police Chowki, Chakan, District-Pune under Sections 7 , 7-A, 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 279 , 336 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned Advocate for the Petitioner, contends that, the present FIR has been filed on 27th September, 2019 by the Respondent No. 4 against Mr. Bhanudas Annasaheb Jadhav, Senior Police Inspector at Mhalunge Police Chowki, Mr Ajay Bhapkar and one unknown person. The crux of the allegations against the accused in the FIR are that, Mr. Bhanudas Annasaheb Jadhav demanded a bribe of Rs. 10 Lakhs from the Respondent No.4 to file a favorable report in FIR No. 1010 of 2019. The FIR No. 1010 of 2019, was filed by Mr. Manish Sham Rangwani against the Respondent No.4 and others for offences punishable under Sections 420 ,465,467,468,471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. Respondent No.4, in
A FIR initiates criminal proceedings without needing specific role attribution; sufficient evidence during investigation upholds its validity, especially in corruption cases.
Point of Law : Dismissal of petition to Quash of FIR – Commission of cognizable offence and pendency of investigation – cannot be quashed.
The court ruled that allegations in an FIR must disclose a prima facie case for investigation, and mere recovery of cash without evidence linking the accused to a bribery transaction does not suffice....
The court established that prima facie evidence of a bribe demand is sufficient to justify an investigation under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and that quashing an FIR should be an exception rat....
The judgment established the principle that a second FIR for the same cause may not be permissible if the incidents could have been investigated in the first FIR, and that the abuse of power by the I....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of specific and credible evidence to establish the commission of a cognizable offence, especially in cases involving allegations of....
Proof of demand and acceptance of bribe is essential to establish an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The court held that allegations of bribery against a public servant, supported by video evidence, constitute a cognizable offence, and FIRs should not be quashed unless they are patently absurd or do....
Point of Law : Power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings, High Court would have to proceed entirely on basis of allegations made in complaint or documents accompanying same per se....
The court upheld the validity of the FIR against the petitioners for vote buying, emphasizing that allegations of corruption warrant investigation despite claims of political vendetta.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.