Santosh S/O Baliram Pawade v. State Of Mah. Thr. Secretary Dept Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Mantralaya, Mumbai A

(1) 1.wp.505.2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.505 OF 2020 Santosh s/o Baliram Pawade ..VS..

The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary Department Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32 and others --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court'

s or Judge'

s orders appearances, Court'

s orders of directions and Registrar'

s orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri N. S. Khandewale, Counsel for the petitioner. Smt. K. R. Deshpande, Addl. P. P. for the respondent nos.1 to 5. CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.

DATED : 20/10/2020 Heard Shri Khandewale, learned Counsel for the petitioner.

By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction to the police Authorities for registration of the FIR for various offences including the offence of cheating against the respondent nos. 6 to 11 on the ground that these respondents, in spite of earning handsome income annually, which is much more than annual income of Rs.44,000/-, have received food grains under a Government scheme, called Priority Household Scheme.

(2) 1.wp.505.2020 The maximum income fixed for conferring benefits to the poor persons under the priority household scheme floated under the provisions of The National Food Security Act, 2013 and The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006.

It is submitted that the respondents being not poor, were not at all entitled to receive such benefits. The petitioner claims to be a social worker interested in social cause. The petitioner has obtained certain documents in proof of his contentions regards income earned by some respondents out of the respondent nos. 6 to 11. These respondents belong to village Bibi and village Nanda. The petitioner, who is espousing a public cause, however, has not elicited any information about the entire village populace so that all of the wrong doors can be brought to book and it appears that the petitioner has only targeted members of one family. Obviously, the cause being canvassed through this petition appears to be private one and not public and therefore, this petition deserves to be

(3) 1.wp.505.2020 dismissed on the ground of questionable agenda of the petitioner.

The writ petition stands dismissed with costs of 1000/-( one thousand).

␏8 ␏8 JUDGE JUDGE Sarkate