Shailaja v. State of Maharashtra

[Per Prithviraj K. Chavan, J.]:

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P appearing for the Respondent No.1-State and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No.2.

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith, with the consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal. 1 of 6 SHAILAJA SHRIKANT HALKUDE SHRIKANT HALKUDE Learned A.P.P waives notice on behalf of the respondent No.1- State and Mr. Paranjape, learned Counsel waives notice on behalf of the respondent No.2-first informant.

The petitioners herein have invoked inherent powers of this Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr. P.C") along with Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for quashing the First Information Report (for short "F.I.R") registered with the Mahim Police Station bearing No.288 of 2020 on 7th November, 2020 for the alleged offences punishable under sections 141, 143, 147, 149, 324, 504, 188, 269, 270 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and 4 and 5 of the Epidemic Disease Act lodged by respondent No.2 on the premise that the parties have amicably resolved their dispute.

It is pertinent to note that there is a cross case registered by petitioner No.1 herein on the same day with the same Police Station vide C.R. No.289 of 2020 against respondent No.2 and his acquaintances making identical allegations, consequent upon which, same sections came to be invoked against respondent 2 of 6 No.2 also, along with sections 4 and 5 of the Epidemic Disease Act.

Briefly stated, prosecution case is that on 6th October, 2020 around 21.30 hours when the respondent No.2-first informant was standing outside his house, he noticed a local lady namely Shahrunissa scolding some boys who were fighting on the road. The said boys abused Mrs. Shahrunissa and left the spot. After a while, the petitioners along with some persons came to the spot and assaulted the first informant with a pointed object on his back. Another accused assaulted the first informant with kick and blows. Since the first informant fell on the ground, he could not see the persons assaulting him.

Respondent No.2 thereafter approached the respondent No.1 and lodged an F.I.R, as above.

Charge-sheet has not yet been filed in this case. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking quashing of the C.R in view of an amicable settlement between the respondent No.2 and them. 3 of 6

We have perused the papers, so also, the medical certificate issued by K.B. Bhabha Hospital, Bandra (West) to the respondent No.2. It depicts simple injury in the form of abrasion and contusion on the nose, abdomen and back of the respondent No.2 which is by some blunt object.

Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and as such, the respondent No.2 has no objection if the proceeding i.e the aforesaid C.R. is quashed and set aside, in view of the amicable settlement between the parties.

Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 has tendered an affidavit of the respondent No.2 duly affirmed before the Notary. The said affidavit is taken on record. Learned Counsel for the respondent No.2 has also tendered a photostat copy of the Aadhar Card of the respondent No.2. The same is taken on record. The respondent No.2 is present in the Court and he reiterates the contents of the said Affidavit. Learned 4 of 6 Counsel for the respondent No.2 identifies the respondent No.2. Learned A.P.P has also verified the original Aadhar Card of the respondent No.2.

In view of the same, respondent No.2 has no objection for quashing of the proceedings as against the petitioners. On being asked, the respondent No.2 reiterates what is stated by him in the affidavit, that he has no objection to quashing of the proceedings.

Having considered the nature of the allegations, nature of the dispute, amicable settlement between the parties, no objection of the respondent No.2 and the judicial pronouncements of the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another1 and Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another2, there is no impediment in allowing the petition.

The petition is accordingly allowed and the F.I.R registered vide C.R. No.288 of 2020 against the petitioners registered with the Mahim Police Station, Mumbai is quashed and set aside. 1 2