1 090721apl604.21.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION [APL] NO. 604 OF 2021

SMT. PUSHPA PRABHAKAR BOKADE AND OTHERS

VERSUS

STATE OF MAH., THRU. P.S.O., P.S., HUDKESHWAR, NAGPUR AND ANOTHER

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of

Court'

s or Judge'

s Order

Coram, appearances, Court'

s Orders

or directions and Registrar'

s order

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Swapnil K. Wankhade, Advocate for the applicants.

Mr. T. A. Mirza, A. P. P. for the non-applicant no.1 /State

CORAM : V. M. DESHPANDE and

AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATE : JULY 09, 2021.

1.

Heard Mr. Swapnil K. Wankhade, learned counsel

for the applicants. Mr. T. A. Mirza, learned Additional

Public Prosecutor for the respondent no.1/State.

2.

This is an application under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing and setting aside

the prosecution vide charge-sheet no. 162/2020 registered

vide Regular Criminal Case No. 313/2021 pending on the

file of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur in

connection with First Information Report vide Crime No.

260/2021 dated 10.07.2020 for the offence punishable

under Sections 294, 506-B read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code.

3.

The First Information Report was lodged by non-

applicant no.2 alleging therein that on 10.07.2020 at

2 090721apl604.21.odt

about 7.30 a.m. the applicant reached the house of non-

applicant no.2 and abused him in filthy language and

threatened to kill him.

4.

The investigating agency carried out the

investigation and has recorded the statements of the

witnesses. The investigating agency, after completion of

the investigation, has filed the chage-sheet. The

applicants have, therefore, challenged the charge-sheet by

filing the present application.

5.

Mr. Wankhade, learned counsel for the applicants

submitted that registration of the complaint against the

applicants is not a legitimate prosecution since there was a

civil dispute between the applicants and non-applicant

no.2. He submitted that since registration of the

prosecution was with mala fide intention, the first

information report and the charge-sheet deserve to be

quashed and set aside.

6.

We have carefully considered the allegations made

in the first information report so also the statements of the

witnesses recorded by the investigating agency. Prima

facie, the statements of two witnesses namely Shashank

Sathe and Nishant Chichkhede, who are the independent

witnesses, have supported the case of the prosecution.

Therefore, unless the prosecution is given an opportunity

to lead evidence in the trial, at this stage, we are not

3 090721apl604.21.odt

inclined to quash and set aside the prosecution against the

applicants by exercising the powers under Section 482 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7.

It is a settled law that while exercising the power

under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the

Court should exercise the same sparingly and in

exceptional circumstances.

8.

The learned counsel for the applicants tried to

make out the grounds as envisaged in the case of State of

Haryana .vs. Bhajan Lal and others, reported in 1992

Supp (1) SCC 335. Since, prima facie, we find that there

is sufficient material collected by the prosecution against

the applicants, which requires trial, there is no merit in

the application. The criminal application is, therefore,

dismissed.

JUDGE

JUDGE

Diwale