cria2558.21

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2558 OF 2021

Prashant S/o Shivaji Mitkar,

Age-41 years, Occu:Service,

R/o-Naldurg, Taluka-Tuljapur,

District-Osmanabad

...APPLICANT

VERSUS

1) The State of Maharashtra,

Through Police Station,

Tuljapur, District-Osmanabad,

2) Sumitra Angad Pandhare,

Age-41 years, Occu:Service,

R/o-C/o-Sanjay Shankar Ghange,

Rachana Hites, Behind Arya Samaj

Mandir, Beside Ladies Club,

Osmanabad, District-Osmanabad.

...RESPONDENTS

...

Mr.Rajendra S. Deshmukh, Senior Counsel i/b. Mr. D.R.

Deshmukh Advocate for Applicant.

Mr.M.M. Nerlikar, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1.

Mr.N.R. Shaikh Advocate and Mr. Shaikh Ashraf Patel

Advocate for Respondent No.2.

...

CORAM: SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND

RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 23^rd NOVEMBER, 2022

ORDER [ PER SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.] :

1.

Present Application has been filed invoking the inherent

cria2558.21

2

powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure for quashing the First Information Report (for short

“FIR”) as well as by way of amendment quashing of the entire

charge-sheet against the present applicant. The FIR was lodged

by respondent No.2 with Tuljapur Police Station, District-

Osmanabad vide Crime No.327 of 2021 on 30^th September 2021

for the offence punishable under Section 406, 420, 467, 468,

471 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(p) of the

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act (for short “Atrocities Act”) and after completion of

the charge-sheet, during the pendency of the Application, it is

before the learned Special Judge under the Atrocities Act at

Osmanabad vide Special Case (Atrocity) No.18 of 2022.

2.

Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr. Rajendra S. Deshmukh,

instructed by learned Advocate Mr. D.R. Deshmukh Advocate for

the applicant, learned APP Mr. M.M. Nerlikar, for Respondent

No.1 and learned Advocate Mr. N.R. Shaikh with learned

Advocate Mr. Shaikh Ashraf Patel for Respondent No.2.

3.

It has been vehemently submitted by the learned Senior

Counsel representing the applicant that perusal of the FIR would

cria2558.21

3

show that the informant is admitting that she had taken loan

from Sandhya Shikshak Sahakari Patsanstha, Tuljapur. The

informant – respondent No.2 has given 10 cheques towards the

loan taken from the Patsanstha on 22^nd November 2018. The

informant has then stated that she has not repaid the entire

loan. It is still remaining to be paid. It is then stated that out of

those 10 cheques, one cheque bearing No.753018 has been

misused by the applicant and it has been got issued in his name

i.e. personal account. When that cheque was presented for

encashment, it was dishonoured and then after issuing legal

notice, the applicant has filed the complaint. It is then stated

that the said act has been done by the applicant as he had the

knowledge that respondent No.2 is member of the scheduled

caste. Learned Senior Counsel pointed out that the private

complaint came to be filed on 27^th August 2021 before the

learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tuljapur under Section

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. If the cheques were

given to Patsanstha on 22^nd November 2018, it could not have

been the subject matter of the complaint and contents of the

said complaint rather show that the said cheque was issued on

2^nd June 2021 and when it was dishonoured on 8^th July 2021 and

returned to complainant – applicant on 8^th July 2021, notice

cria2558.21

4

came to be issued on 28^th July 2021 to the informant –

respondent No.2 through the Advocate of the applicant. When

the notice was not complied with, the said complaint was filed

a