← Library
Bombay High CourtAPPLN/2608/2024dismissed

Shobhabai W/O Keshav Dongre And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2024-08-06Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Abhay S. Waghwase2 pages

2024:BHC-AUG:17391-DB cria-2608.24 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 930 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2608 OF 2024 SHOBHABAI W/O KESHAV DONGRE AND OTHERS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...

Mr. Govind G. Suryawanshi Advocate for Applicants. Mr. M.K. Goyanka, A.P.P. for Resp. No.1.

...

CORAM: SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JJ.

DATE : 6th AUGUST, 2024 ORDER :

1.

Present Application has been filed for quashing the First Information Report (for short "the FIR") vide Crime No. 719 of 2023 lodged by respondent No.2 with Rural Police Station, Nanded for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 354, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2.

Heard learned Advocate for the applicants and learned APP for respondent No.1. It is not even necessary to issue notice to respondent No.2.

3.

After perusal of the FIR, it can be seen that role is attributed to all the applicants. It was tried to be submitted on behalf of the applicants that there was some relationship

cria-2608.24 between accused No.1, who is not before this Court, and respondent No.2 and in fact the applicants had gathered at the place to attend the marriage ceremony of original accused No.1. Since the applicants are the lady members, no motive can be attributed as against them.

4.

As aforesaid, perusal of the FIR would show that role is attributed to the applicants. A statement has been made, upon inquiry, on behalf of the applicants that still the charge-sheet is not filed. That means the investigation is still pending. The powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have to be exercised in rare cases. Though there might be some relationship between original accused No.1 and respondent No.2, which may not be approved by the applicants, yet as regards the offence concerned, when the role is attributed, we do not consider this to be a fit case where we should exercise our powers.

5.

The Application stands dismissed at the threshold. [ABHAY S. WAGHWASE] [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI] JUDGE JUDGE asb/AUG24