Mohammad Asif S/O. Mohammad Haneef And Others v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police Station Officer Police Station Shendurjhanaghat Warud Amravati And

apl37.17.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) 37/2017 Mohammad Asif s/o Mohammad Haneef & Ors. ..vs.. State of Maharashtra, thr. PSO P. S. Shendurjanaghat, Tq. Warud Dist. Amravati and anr. _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Dr. A. H. Jamal, Advocate for applicants.

Mr. V. A. Thakare, A.P.P. for non applicant no.1. Mr. Sudhir Malode, Advocate for respondent. No.2. CORAM : B. P. DHARMADHIKARI AND V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATED :

APRIL 13, 2017 Heard.

Contention is, in view of signature on stamp paper and consequential compromise, the dispute has come to an end. This signature on stamp paper is not being accepted by the non applicant no.2-complainant. She has pointed out two instances in her FIR, which prima facie make out an offence.

Contention that the husband and wife were residing separately and in laws never went to their residence, cannot be looked into at this stage. The defence is irrelevant in the present proceedings. Reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Geeta Mehrotra & anr. ..vs.. State of Uttar Pradesh & anr.; reported in (2012) 10 SCC 741 is also unwarranted.

apl37.17.odt The learned A.P.P. submits that the investigation is almost over and the charge-sheet can be presented within three weeks.

In view of this statement, we find that there is no possibility of any coercive steps against the applicants.

In this situation, without observing anything more and keeping all the contentions open, we dispose of the present application. No order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE kahale