Raj S/O Mohan Mehara v. State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Rjapeth Amravati And Another

2025:BHC-NAG:5432-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.102 OF A PPLICANT :

Raj S/o Mohan Mehra, Age 26 years, Occ - Private Job, R/o Dattavihar Colony, Amravati.

..VERSUS..

NON-APPLICANTS :

1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Rajapeth, Amravati.

2) Dr. Raviraj (Swiraj) Sadhuprasad Pande, Aged about 34 years, Occ- Medical Officer, R/o Shri Venkatesh Colony, Amravati Road, Amravati.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mr M.P. Kariya, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr S.S. Doifode, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant No.1/State. Mr Alok Daga, Advocate for Non-applicant No.2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM

: ANIL S. KILOR AND PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 12/0 6 /2025 ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : Anil S. Kilor, J.) 1.

Heard.

2.

Rule. The Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

3.

By way of present application, a prayer is made for quashing of First Information Report (FIR) No.645 of 2018 dated 13.09.2018 registered with Police Station, Rajapeth, Dist. Amravati city, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 384, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 4.

It is the case of the prosecution that, on the date of incident, three unknown persons came and they told the complainant that they were sent by the applicant. They further asked the complainant to tell her sister to take back the report lodged by her at the police station against the applicant. It is further alleged that, they asked for Rs.2,00,000/- to Rs.4,00,000/- from the complainant as per the direction of the applicant. 5.

There are multiple FIRs registered by both the parties against each other, where-from it is evident that, there is a rivalry between the applicant and the non-applicant No.2. In the backdrop of such rivalry, if the allegations are considered, it it is evident that, the applicant was not present on the spot. However, some unknown persons who were alleged to have been involved in the alleged offence stated the name of the applicant. Thus, the case of the

prosecution is not that the applicant played any role in the alleged offence. However, the FIR came to be registered against the applicant for the reason that, the unknown persons mentioned his name. There is every likelihood that, the complaint is frivolous and made out of rivalry.

6.

In that view of the matter, though the learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel for the non-applicant No.2 strongly opposed the present application, we are of the opinion that, this is a fit case for quashing of the FIR. Accordingly, we pass the following order:- i) The Criminal Application is allowed.

ii) The First Information Report No.645 of 2018, dated 13.09.2018, registered with Police Station, Rajapeth, Dist. Amravati city, for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 384, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, is hereby quashed and set aside.

Rule accordingly.

(PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) C.L. Dhakate