High Court · 2025

Legal Reasoning

cria-1522.231 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1522 OF 2023Shivraj Damodhar Shinde,Age-25 years, Occu:Student,R/o-Plot No.7/8, Mahajan Colony,N-2, Cidco, Aurangabad. ...APPLICANT VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Investigating Officer, Crime No.0067/2023, Mukundwadi Police Station, Aurangabad,2) Shivaji Navnath Kawale, Age-25 years, Occu:Education, R/o-Flat No.6, Shubhadra Apartment, Ulkanagari, Aurangabad. ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr. Sandeep B. Rajebhosale Advocate for Applicant. Mr. A.R. Kale, Additional P.P. for Respondent No.1 -State. Mr. Jay Raundale Advocate h/f. Mr. Ishwar K. Wagh Advocate for Respondent No.2. ... CORAM: SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.DATE OF RESERVING ORDER : 18th JUNE 2025DATE OF PRONOUNCING ORDER : 23rd JULY 2025 cria-1522.232ORDER [PER SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.] :1.Present Application has been filed, initially for quashingthe First Information Report (for short “the FIR”) vide CrimeNo. 67 of 2023 registered with Mukundwadi Police Station,Aurangabad on 16th February 2023, for the offence punishableunder Sections 307, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian PenalCode, and later on, by way of amendment for quashing theproceedings in R.C.C. No.1400 of 2023, pending before thelearned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Aurangabad. 2.Heard learned Advocate Mr. Rajebhosale appearing for theapplicant, learned Additional P.P. Mr. Kale appearing for State andlearned Advocate Mr. Raundale holding for learned Advocate Mr.Wagh for respondent No.2.3.Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant has taken usthrough the entire charge-sheet and then submits that it appearsthat earlier incident had taken place somewhere in ConnaughtPlace, Aurangabad around 9.30 p.m. of 15th February 2023,wherein it is stated that there was some trifle dispute betweenthe present applicant, his friends and some boys from Harsoolvillage. Thereafter all of them went their own way. The informant cria-1522.233says that thereafter he went to meet present applicant near thewater tank in N-2 area after half an hour, where the applicantand his friends were practicing beating of drums. Informant saysthat he asked the applicant, as to on which ground there wasdispute at Connaught Place. At that time one Santosh Sonawane,who was present there, assaulted the informant with iron rod onhis head on left side and one Shubham Dehade had assaultedthe informant on his head with some weapon from back side.Present applicant and others had assaulted him by kicks and fistsand abused him. The informant’s friend Amol Jadhav @ Dhammatook him to Sahyadri Hospital, Ramnagar on his motorcycle,where M.R.I. was taken and thereafter he was admitted to OrionCity Care Hospital. Important point to be noted is that theinformant has filed an affidavit to the Anticipatory BailApplication No. 492 of 2023 filed by accused Santosh Sonawane.In the said affidavit it has been stated that due to misconceptionand inadvertence he has taken the name of Santosh Sonawaneand he has no objection for grant of pre-arrest bail to SantoshSonawane. That means, the entire story itself is concocted.There was no enmity between the applicant and respondentNo.2. Most of the witnesses are hear-say witnesses, except Amol@ Dhamma Shivaji Jadhav. But if we consider his statement cria-1522.234carefully, it can be seen that witness Amol went to the spot afterthe alleged incident. He was proceeding towards his housearound 22.20 hours when he found a person lying on the road,he stopped his motorcycle and went near the injured. Amolrecognized him as informant, respondent No.2 and upon inquirythe informant had given him the story. That means, he is not aneye witness as he is tried to be projected in the FIR. Except thecontents of the FIR, there is nothing on record and therefore, itwould be unjust to ask the applicant to face the trial. 4.Per contra, the learned APP as well as learned Advocate forrespondent No.2 vehemently objected the application andsubmitted that the FIR for the offence under Section 160 of theIndian Penal Code came to be lodged vide Crime No.88 of 2023with Cidco Police Station, Aurangabad on the basis of FIR Lodgedby the Police Station Officer Vishal Sanjay Khute. He along withother police persons were on patrolling duty. Around 21.30 hourson 15th February 2023, they received a phone call that somepersons were committing affray near Raigad Shop House inConnaught Place, N-5 area. Present applicant has been namedas Shiva Kale. So, certainly an incident at Connaught Place hadtaken place. Informant has also stated that he alone had gone tomeet the applicant after half an hour of the earlier dispute. The cria-1522.235medical record i.e. MLC that was given by Orion City Care SuperSpeciality Hospital, would also show that the informant had gonefor settling the dispute in which he received injuries. There arephotographs of the injuries sustained by the informant. Theinjuries sustained are- (i) CLW over Occipital and parietal region,(ii) minimal subgaleal hematoma in right temporal region.Therefore, when the informant has sustained the injuries and theinvestigation is over, it will not be a fit case where the inherentpowers should be exercised. 5.At the outset, we would like to say that merely becausethere is no eye witness to the incident, we cannot throw a case ifprima facie offence is made out. The contents of the FIR arealready narrated and therefore, we do not want to reproduce thesame. The informant has given his reason as to why he wentafter half an hour of the earlier incident, to meet the applicant.In the earlier incident the informant had not sustained any injurynor the dispute was with him. It appears that when theinformant asked the applicant, what was the reason behind thedispute between his group and the other group, he wasattacked. 6.Now, as regards the assailant Santosh Sonawane, the cria-1522.236informant might have compromised the matter and thereupon hehas stated that he had taken name of Santosh Sonawaneinadvertently, but that cannot be the ground to brand the FIR asfalse or lodged with mala fide intention. The informant hassustained injuries and in respect of the earlier dispute, on thebasis of the FIR lodged by the police, offence under Section 160of the Indian Penal Code has been lodged. Witness Amol is theperson who reached the spot immediately and at that place itselfthe informant had given the history of assault, though otherwitnesses who are the relatives of the informant appear to behear-say witnesses. Therefore, we do not find this to be a fitcase where we should exercise our powers under Section 482 ofthe Code or Criminal Procedure.7.The Application stands dismissed. [SANJAY A. DESHMUKH] [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI] JUDGE JUDGEasb/JULY25