SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - BENCH AT NAGPUR
RAJESH S/O OMPRAKASH RATHOR AND OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH PSO P.S. SITABULDI, NAGPUR AND ANOTHER – Respondent
APL 140/2016



Advocates:
['M S WAKIL', 'MISS SEEMA GAJANAN BHAGATMISS SEEMA GAJANAN BHAGAT', 'SAUD AFSAR', 'MISS SEEMA GAJANAN BHAGAT', 'APP', '', 'R R RAJKARNE', 'VINOD KHOBRE', 'P C DHAWADE', 'FOR/R']

14 apl 140. 16.jud(1).odt

1/4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.140 OF 2016

Applicant No.1:

Mr. Rajesh S/o Omprakash Rathor

(Orig Accd No.1)

Aged about: 32 Years,

Occupation: Advocate

Applicant No.2

Mr. Omprakash S/o Radheshyamji Rathor

(Orig Accud No.3) Aged about: 58 Years,

Occupation: Nil

Applicant No.3:

Mrs. Mangla W/o Omprakash Rathor

(Orig Accd No.2)

Aged about: 55 Years,

Occupation: Housewife

Applicant No.1 to 3

R/o: Jai Bajrang Bhawan, 2nd floor

Tekdi Line, Sitabuldi,

Nagpur

Applicant No.4:

Ms. Komal D/o Omprakash Rathor

(Orig Accd No.4)

Aged about: 29 Years,

Occupation: Service

R/o: Qtr No.7

A-VI. TA 2

Vikramnagar

Ahmedabad (GJ)

Applicant No.5:

Mrs. Soni W/o Sachin Choudhary

(Orig Accd No.5)

Aged about 31 years,

Occ: Housewife

R/o: B-2 608, Karol Bagh

MR, 10 Opposite Arvindo Hospital

Luv Kush Square,

Indore (MP)

// VERSUS //

Non-applicant No.1

The State of Maharashtra,

Through P.S.O.

Police Station Sitabuldi

Dist: Nagpur;

14 apl 140. 16.jud(1).odt

2/4

Non Applicant No.2:

Mrs. Parul W/o Rajesh Rathor

(Orig Complainant)

Aged about 30 Years

Occ: Lecturer,

R/o: C/o: Mahesh J. Chaudhary

In front of Deular House,

Near, Devanjhali Building,

Besides Vateshwar Hanuman

Mandir, Reshambag,

Nagpur 09

_____________________________________________________________

Ms. Priyanka Dubey, Advocate h/f Shri M.S. Wakil, Advocate for the

applicants.

Shri N.S. Rao, APP for the non-applicant No.1/State.

___________________________________________________________________

CORAM : Z. A. HAQ AND

AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATE : 10.03.2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT: [PER: AMIT B. BORKAR, J.]

1.

By this application under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, the applicants have challenged registration

of the First Information Report No.337/2015 dated 13.09.2015

registered with the non-applicant No.1-Police Station and the

charge-sheet No.81/2016 pending before Judicial Magistrate

First Class, Court No.2 Nagpur for the offence punishable under

Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

The First Information Report came to be registered

against the applicants with the accusations that the applicants

treated the non-applicant No.2 with physical and mental cruelty.

14 apl 140. 16.jud(1).odt

3/4

After the investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed against the

applicants. The applicants have therefore, filed present

application challenging filing of the charge-sheet. This Court on

07.10.2016 issued Rule and continued the interim relief already

granted by this Court.

3.

On 09.09.2020 the Advocate for the non-applicant

No.2 was absent. On 03.03.2021 also Advocate for the non

applicant No.2 was absent and therefore, matter was adjourned

till 8th March 2021. Today when the matter is called out, the

Advocate for the non-applicant No.2 is absent. The Advocate for

the applicants has tendered a pursis stating that the dispute

between the applicant No.1 and the non-applicant No.2 is

amicably resolved in mediation proceedings. The Advocate for

the applicants has submitted photo state copy of certified copy of

the mediation report wherein the consent terms recorded before

the Mediator are annexed. As per clause (4) of the consent terms

agreed before the Mediator, the non-applicant No.2 has given no

objection for quashing present Criminal Application.

4.

In view of the terms of settlement agreed before the

Mediator brought on record by way of Pursis filed by the

14 apl 140. 16.jud(1).odt

4/4

Advocate for the applicants against the applicants deserve to be

quashed and set aside as the offences alleged against the

applicants are personal in na

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top