Anil Kumar Kunjbihari Almal And ORS. v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR.

Santosh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4074 OF 2019 Anilkumar Kunjbihari Almal & ors.

...Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & anr.

...Respondents

Mr. A. M. Saraogi, for the Petitioners.

Mr. K. V. Saste, APP for the State/Respondent. Mr. Prajot Jaggi, for Resopndent no.2.

CORAM:

RANJIT MORE & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ DATED:

4th OCTOBER, 2019 PC:- 1.

Mentioned for production board. Taken up on production board in view of urgency.

2.

Heard Mr. Saraogi, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Saste, APP for the State and Mr. Jaggi, the learned Counsel for resopndent no.2.

3.

The petition is fled under Section 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code for quashing and setting aside the FIR being CR No.105 of 2007, dated 4th June, 2007, registered with L. T. Marg Police Station at the instance of respondent no.2 for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 341, 342, 170, 323, 506(2) read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

4.

Pending investigation, the parties to the petition have 1/3

settled their dispute amicably and, in pursuance of an understanding arrived at between them, fled the instant petition for quashing the subject FIR by consent. The FIR was fled by respondent No.2. In pursuance of the settlement, Respondent no.2 has fled Affdavit, dated 16th August, 2019. In the said Affdavit respondent no.2 has given no objection for quashing and setting-aside the subject FIR. Respondent No.2 is personally present before the Court. On being questioned, he specifcally stated that he has gone through the petition and the affdavit as well and has fully understood the contents thereof. He further confrmed that he is giving no objection for quashing and setting aside the subject FIR on his own free will and without there being any pressure or coercion. 5.

It can, thus, be seen that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. From the perusal of the complaint, it transpires that the allegations are totally personal in nature. In these circumstances, and especially in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab,1 we fnd that no purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending except burdening the criminal Courts which are already overburdened. However, at the same time, costs need to be saddled on the parties for using the police 2014 AIR (SCW) 2065 2/3

and judicial mechanism for settling their personal disputes. 6.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed in terms of prayer Clause (a) subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- by the petitioner to the "Yashodhan Charitable Trust"

(having Registration No.1895/Satara, Maharashtra, Account No. 60245873355 IFSC Code MAHB000305), an institution that takes care of mentally retarded and elderly people in the downtrodden society. The petitioner shall pay the said costs and produce the receipt thereof on the fle of this Court within a period of four weeks from today, failing which, the petition shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference to the Court and the order quashing the FIR shall be treated as non-est.

7.

Subject to above, the petition stands disposed of. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.] 3/3