Mujib Hamid Shaikh And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2025:BHC-AUG:17639-DB

IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 5 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1577 OF 2025 1.

Mujib Hamid Shaikh, Age : 27 Years, Occu. : Labour, R/o. Sipora Bazar, Tq. Bokardan, Dist. Jalna.

2.

Raees Hamid Shaikh, Age : 23 Years, Occu. : Labour, R/o. Sipora Bazar, Tq. Bokardan, Dist. Jalna.

3.

Rafik Hameed Shaikh, Age : 20 Years, Occu. : Student, R/o. Sipora Bazar, Tq. Bokardan, Dist. Jalna.

4.

Pashu Ahmed Shaikh, Age : 53 Years, Occu. : Nil, R/o. Sipora Bazar, Tq. Bokardan, Dist. Jalna.

.... Applicants

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through Office in Charge, Bhokardan Police Station, Dist. Jalna.

2.

Summaiya W/o. Mujib Shaikh, Age : 24 Years, Occu. : Labour, R/o. Sipora Bazar, Tq. Bokardan, Dist. Jalna.

At Present R/o. Selgaon, Tq. Badnapur, Dist. Jalna.

.... Respondents

....

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Ajinkya S. Mirajgaonkar APP for Respondent No.1-State : Mr. S.A. Gaikwad ....

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.

Dated : 07th July 2025 PER COURT :- 1.

The present application has been filed for quashing the proceedings in R.C.C. No.233 of 2024, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhokardan, Dist. Jalna, arising out of the First Information Report (for short "the F.I.R."), vide C.R. No.108 of 2024, dated 12.03.2024, registered with Bhokardan Police Station, Dist. Jalna, for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "the I.P.C.").

2.

Heard learned Advocate for the applicants and learned APP for respondent No.1-State. There is no necessity to issue notice to respondent No.2. With the help of learned Advocate for the applicants and learned APP, we have gone through the contents of the chargesheet including the F.I.R.

3.

The informant alleges that she was assaulted with an iron rod on her head, thereby causing bleeding injury to her around 04.30 p.m., on 08.03.2024, by the applicants. This, prima facie, attracts the ingredients of Section 324 of I.P.C. and as regards Sections 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., there are allegations about abuses and threatens as well as causing simple hurt to the relatives of the informant. Though the relationship between the parties appears to be admitted and the informant has also filed a report for the offences punishable under Sections 498, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, against the applicants, that would be a different offence and not allegedly committed around 04.30 p.m. on 08.03.2024. Therefore, we do not find this to be a fit case where we should exercise our powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973. The application stands rejected at the threshold.

[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH ] JUDGE [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ] JUDGE asd