Vijay Ashokrao Jaiswal v. State Of Maharashtra Thr Police Station Kotwali

2026:BHC-NAG:6003-DB 1 apl 1182.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1182 OF 2025 [Vijay Ashokrao Jaiswal vs. State of Maharashtra, through its P.S.O., P.S. Kotwali, District Nagpur and anr.] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------ - - - Mr. U. Y. Sonkusare with Mr. S. M. Kuhikar, Advocates for the applicant Ms. R. V. Sharma, APP for non-applicant no. 1 Mr. C. D. Thamke, Advocate for non-applicant no. 2 CORAM: MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.

DATED : 17-04-2026.

The application is filed for quashing of First Information Report (FIR) No. 215/2025 registered with Kotwali Police Station, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 338 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2.

It is the case of prosecution that the applicant is power of attorney holder of one Ravindra Jaiswal, who is accused no. 1 in the crime. The complainant has lodged the complaint against said Ravindra Jaiswal that he has forged documents and mutated his name in the house which was sold by said accused no. 1 by forging documents. In said execution proceedings, Ravindra Jaiswal had given power of attorney to this applicant only to submit documents before the Registrar. The said power of attorney was special power of attorney for that purpose only. The counsel for applicant argued that there are no other allegations against the applicant like, he had committed any offence, he had forged any document or he

2 apl 1182.2025 is signatory of said sale deed.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that no specific allegation about forgery are made against this applicant and no role is attributed to the applicant. This is a fit case to quash FIR.

4.

Learned counsel for non-applicant no. 2 has opposed the application stating that the applicant is the relative of Ravindra Jaiswal i.e. accused no. 1. He was aware about the facts and thereafter he has produced such documents. The name of accused no. 1 was mutated by submitting forged documents and the applicant was aware about forgery of said documents, hence, prayed to reject the application.

5.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the application stating that the applicant is the power of attorney holder. He was aware about the facts and evidence is required in this case. Hence, he prayed to reject the application.

6.

The allegations made against the applicant are about forging the documents. It appears from the record that the applicant is the only power of attorney holder to submit documents before the Registrar. He has not signed the sale deed, which was executed in favour of one Sheikh Ajruddin Sheikh Naruddin. There are no allegations against the applicant in the FIR. Only because he is the power of attorney holder, the crime is registered against him. There is no any material against him to connect the applicant with this crime. Prima facie, case is made out to

3 apl 1182.2025 quash the FIR. The application is accordingly allowed. 7.

FIR No. 215/2025 registered against the applicant with Kotwali Police Station, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 338 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is quashed and set aside.

8.

The application stands disposed of.

JUDGE wasnik Signed by: Mr. A. Y. Wasnik Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 18/04/2026 17:44:46