Ganesh S/O. Balu Natkar And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 Application 2820 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD Criminal Application No.2820 of 2019 1) Ganesh s/o Balu Natkar, Age 25 years, Occupation : Agriculture.

2) Kartik s/o Balu Natkar, Age 23 years, Occupation ; Agriculture.

3) Prabhawati w/o Balu Natkar, Age 43 years, Occu: Agriculture & Household, All r/o Kadethan (Bk), Taluka Paithan, Dist Aurangabad. .. Applicants.

Versus

1) The State of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.

2) Police Inspector, Police Station, Pachod, Taluka Paithan, Dist Aurangabad.

3) Gangubai w/o Sanjivan Natkar, Age 38 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o Kadethan (Bk), Taluka Paithan, Dist Aurangabad. .. Respondents. ---- Shri. Uttam Telgaonkar, Advocate, for applicants. Shri. R.D. Sanap, Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

Shri. S.P. Salgar, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

2 Application 2820 of 2019 Coram: T.V. NALAWADE & S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.

Date: 06 NOVEMBER 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per T.V. Nalawade, J.):

1) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard both sides for fnal disposal.

2) The present proceeding is fled for the relief of quashing of the proceeding of Sessions Case No.207/2018 presently pending in the Sessions Court Aurangabad. The case is fled for ofences punishable under sections 307, 336,504,506,201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case had arisen out of F.I.R. No.335/2016 registered with Police Station Pachod, Tahsil Paithan, District Aurangabad. During arguments learned counsel for the applicants and the frst informant submitted that the parties have settled the dispute. Attention of this Court is drawn to the similar compromise which was recorded in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Paithan in R.C.C.No.74 of 2018.

3 Application 2820 of 2019 3) This Court has gone through the record of investigation. This record includes injury certifcates in respect of three injured persons. These three persons have fled afidavits to show that they have settled the dispute and they have no objection to grant relief claimed by the present applicants. Though three fractured injuries were caused, the dispute was of personal nature and that can be seen from the compromise document which was fled in the case which was pending before the Judicial Magistrate.

4) The learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly objected to the grant of relief claimed by contending that time of the investigating agency and of this Court is consumed by the parties by fling such proceeding. Only due to present fnancial condition of the farmers this Court is imposing cost on lower side. Hence, following order.

5) The application is allowed. Relief is granted in terms of prayer clause (B) subject to condition of deposit of cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) by the

4 Application 2820 of 2019 applicants with the High Court Legal Services Sub Committee Aurangabad. The cost amount is to be deposited within 15 days from today. If the cost is not deposited within the stipulated time it is to be presumed that the proceeding is disposed of as dismissed. Only if the cost is deposited it is to be presumed that the application is allowed and the relief is granted. Rule made absolute in those terms.

Sd/- Sd/- (S.M. GAVHANE, J.) (T.V. NALAWADE, J.) rsl