Sunilkumar Bansilal Pujari v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 929 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1765 OF 2022 SUNILKUMAR BANSILAL PUJARI

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Abhay R. Rathod APP for Respondent - State : Mr. S.N. Morampalle Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. S.P. Kausalye ...

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.

DATE : AUGUST 11, 2023 PER COURT :

.

This petition takes exception to the order dated 27.09.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-2, Udgir in Criminal Revision Application No.6 of 2021 whereby order dated 30.04.2019 passed by learned JMFC, Udgir in R.C.C. No.174 of 2009 below Exh.1 issuing process against revision petitioner is upheld. 2.

It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a police personnel and that the allegations made against him do not constitute any offence and as such the learned Judicial Magistrate has committed error in issuing process against him. It is his further contention that the said order ought to have 1/3

been interfered with by the learned Revisional Court. 3.

Perusal of the complaint shows that there are specific allegations against the present applicant and co-accused for commission of offence punishable under Sections 166, 167, 190 and 218 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is a pubic servant / Police Officer and it is alleged that he has committed the aforesaid offences during the discharge of his duties. Perusal of the order passed by the learned JMFC of issuance of process indicates that the present respondent no.2 had applied for sanction against petitioner on 03.03.2009, however neither sanction was granted nor his application was rejected. It is the contention of respondent no.

2 that as per recent amendment if permission is not granted or the application is not rejected by the concerned competent authority within 90 days, it is deemed to be permission granted against the public servant. Learned JMFC has also taken into consideration the entire record and reports moved by the police authorities. It is only thereafter the order of issuance of process has been passed against the present petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this is not the case to interfere into the order passed by learned JMFC, which is rightly confirmed by the revisional court.

following order.

ORDER

(i) Petition stands dismissed.

[ R. M. JOSHI ] JUDGE GGP 3/3