Ibrahim Ilyas Chaudhary v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

LSP 1 901 wp 1206.25.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.1206 of 2025 Ibrahim Ilyas Chaudhary ...

Petitioner V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and anr.

...

Respondents.

Mr. Prashant Parsurampuria for the Petitioner. Mr. S.R. Agarkar, APP for the State.

CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M. MODAK, JJ.

Digitally signed by LATA SUNIL PANJWANI Date:

2025.05.06 11:18:51 +0530 LATA SUNIL PANJWANI DATE : 29th April 2025.

P.C.:

This matter is listed at the instance of learned Counsel for the Petitioner. He submitted that in the memo of the writ petition, the Police case number was wrongly mentioned as PS/0800210/2021 on the file of 9th J.M.F.C., 64th Court, Espalande Court, Mumbai. The correct number is PS/0800210/2022. He seeks leave to amend to correct the prayer clause and consequently prays for correction in the order dated 20th March 2025.

2.

Considering that it is a typographical error committed inadvertently while typing the prayer clause in the petition, leave to amend is granted to correct the case number in the prayer clause of the petition. Amendment be carried out forthwith. 3.

Consequently, the order dated 20th March 2025 be also

LSP 2 901 wp 1206.25.doc corrected and instead of case number PS/0800210/2021, the correct number PS/0800210/2022 be mentioned in the first paragraph and in the operative portion of the order.

4.

The rest of the order shall remain as it is. The corrected order be uploaded.

(S.M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL,J.) CORRECTED ORDER DATED 20.03.2025 BE READS THUS:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1206 OF 2025 Ibrahim Ilyas Chaudhary ..Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

..Respondents __________ Mr. Prashant Parsurampuria a/w. Kejeshri Thakar for Petitioner. Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP for State/Respondent.

Mr. K. M. Sinah for the Respondent No.2.

__________ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S. M. MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 20 MARCH 2025 PC :

1.

This is a petition for quashing of the Police case bearing

LSP 3 901 wp 1206.25.doc No. PS/0800210/2022 on the file of 9th J.M.F.C., 64th Court, Esplanade Court, Mumbai, under sections 338, 337 and 279 of the I.P.C. and under sections 134(a) and 134(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The proceedings are arising out of the C.R.No.314 of 2021, registered at Marine Drive police station, Mumbai, on 31.07.2021.

2.

Heard Mr. Prashant Parsurampuria, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Agarkar, learned APP for the State and Mr. Sinah, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2. 3.

The F.I.R. is lodged by the Respondent No.2. He has stated that on 31.07.2021, he started going home at about 4:45p.m. His co-worker Omkar offered him to give a lift on his two wheeler. The informant was riding as pillion rider on Activa two wheeler and going towards North direction. At about 5:00p.m., the Petitioner came from the opposite side and took U turn where U turn was not permitted and caused this accident. The Respondent No.2 and Omkar, rider of the vehicle, fell down on the road. Within a short time police van came to the spot and took the Respondent No.2 to J.J. Hospital. The Respondent No.2 had

LSP 4 901 wp 1206.25.doc suffered fracture below his right knee. On these allegations the F.I.R. was lodged. The investigation was carried out and the charge-sheet was filed. The charge-sheet contain statements of Omkar, Beat Marshal Girish Tandel and spot panchanama. The charge-sheet also contains the medical certificate in respect of the injuries suffered by the Respondent No.2. There was fracture on the right tibia fibula. A copy of the charge-sheet is produced by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. It is taken on record and marked 'X' collectively for identification.

4.

The matter is now settled between the parties. The Respondent No.2 has filed his Affidavit giving his consent for quashing of these proceedings. He has stated in his affidavit that, he is fully recovered and he has resumed the work. The Petitioner was aged 22 years at the time of accident. The petitioner is still unemployed. There is nobody to support his family. The Respondent No.2 accepted that it was an accident. There was no intention on the part of the petitioner to cause any injury to the Respondent No.2. Considering his future, career, health and his family, the Respondent No.2 was giving consent for quashing of these proceedings.

LSP 5 901 wp 1206.25.doc 5.

The Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. He is identified by his learned counsel. He reiterated the contents of the Affidavit. He stated before the Court that, he has no objection for quashing of the proceedings; in these circumstances. 6.

We have considered these submissions. The sentiments expressed by the informant in his Affidavit-in-reply are commendable. We respect these sentiments. The Respondent No.2 does not wish to prosecute this matter any further. He is fully recovered from his injuries. The injury was not life threatening. The informant also accepted that it was an accident. In this view of the matter, we are inclined to allow this petition. 7.

Hence, the following order:

O R D E R

i) The Police case bearing No. PS/0800210/2022 on the file of 9th J.M.F.C., 64th Court, Esplanade Court, Mumbai, under sections 338, 337 and 279 of the I.P.C. and under sections 134(a) and 134(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, arising out of the C.R.No.314 of 2021, registered at Marine Drive police station, Mumbai, on

LSP 6 901 wp 1206.25.doc 31.07.2021, is quashed and set aside.

ii) The Writ Petition is disposed of.

(S. M. MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL,J.)