High Court

Legal Reasoning

1APPLN.1739.2023.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,BENCH AT AURANGABAD.CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1739 OF 2023Ayub Haji Muneer PinjariAge 53 years, Occ. Business, R/o Gausiya Nagar, Dondaicha, Ta. Shindkheda, District Dhule.… ApplicantVersus1.The State of MaharashtraThrough Police Inspector, Dondaicha Police Station,Ta. Shindkheda, District Dhule. 2.Prashant Walmik PatilAge 29 years, Occ. Service, as Headmaster, R/o SVS ITC, Dondaicha, Ta. Shindkheda, District Dhule.… Respondents...Mr. N. L. Chaudhari, Advocate for Applicants.Mr. V. K. Kotecha, APP for Respondent / State....CORAM :SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.DATE :07th April, 2025.O R D E R: (Per Sanjay A. Deshmukh, J.)1Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties. 2APPLN.1739.2023.odt2This is an application under Section 482 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Cr.P.C.”) for quashing of theFIR (for short the “report”) bearing Crime No.45 of 2022, dated 2ndFebruary, 2022, registered with Dondaicha Police Station, TalukaSindkheda, District Dhule, for the offences punishable under Sections379 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code, and the proceedings in RCCNo.89 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge JuniorDivision and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dondaicha, for theoffences punishable under Sections 379, 380, 395, 120-B, 412, 413,201 and 401 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3The informant averred in the report that he is theHeadmaster of Technical Training Institute viz SVS ITC, Dondaicha,Taluka Shindkheda, District Dhule. He is serving there since 2018.Pramod Pandit Salve, Pandit Uttam Salve and Jyatisingh PhulsingMalche are serving in the said institution as watchmen. There are sixworkshops permanently constructed. It’s top has been covered in theiron and tin sheets. These workshops contained various industrialtools and equipment like electric motors, drill machines, lathemachines, etc. It is further averred that due to the Covid-19 pandemic,the working hours of the said institution was 10:00 am to 4:00 pm. Thepeon, Avinash Atmaram Patil used to open and close the workshopsand office rooms. The office superintendent Chandrasing Rajput was 3APPLN.1739.2023.odtkeeping keys of those locks with him. 4The informant further averred in the report that on 2ndFebruary, 2022, he and other staff members reached in the saidinstitution around 10:00 am. Peon Avinash Patil took the keys from thesuperintendent of institution. Workshop No.2 was closed for fifteendays. Upon opening the workshop, they noticed that a drill machinewas lying near the window, which seemed suspiciously moved. Onfurther inspection, they realized that a total of 12 electric motors weremissing from their foundation spots. Peon Avinash immediatelycommunicated that fact to the Superintendent Rajput through a phonecall. He made phone call to the informant. The informant and otherstaff members rushed to the workshop and confirmed that the motorswere indeed missing. The informant then instructed the peon to checkthe other workshops. Workshop No.3, which was closed for fifteendays, was also opened. Upon opening it, they found that drill machinewas not there. The informant further stated that the all staff memberswere called to the spot and upon questioning them and verification,they realized that some unknown person had gained access to theworkshops by entering through an open space near the bottom of themetal sheet. The said person with dishonest intention, stolen awaymaterials particularly machinery etc. The list of stolen items, alongwith their quantity and approximate value, which was drawn up is as 4APPLN.1739.2023.odtfollows:From Electrician Workshop No.2:1.Motor Generator (A.C. to D.C.) – Rs.5,5002.D.C. Compound Generator with Control Panel – Rs.13,0003.D.C. Series Motor – Rs.5,0004.D.C. Shunt Motor – Rs.5,0005.D.C. Compound Motor – Rs.5,0006.A.C. Squirrel Cage Motor – Rs.4,0007.A.C. Series Type Motor – Rs.4,0008.Single Phase Capacitor Motor – Rs.3,0009.Universal Motor – Rs.3,00010.Thyristor Motor – Rs.10,00011.Synchronous Motor (3 Phase) – Rs.13,00012.Thyristor A.C. Motor – Rs.13,000From Electrician Workshop No.3:13. A.C. Series Type Motor – Rs.8,00014. Single Phase Capacitor Motor – Rs.4,00015. 3-Phase Motor – Rs.14,00016. A.C. Squirrel Cage Motor – Rs.11,00017. A.C. Slip Ring Motor – Rs.15,00018. Universal Motor – Rs.9,00019. Synchronous Motor (3 Phase) – Rs.15,00020. Thyristor A.C. Drive – Rs.10,00021. Thyristor D.C. Drive – Rs.10,00022. D.C. Induction Motor – Rs.10,50023. D.C. Shunt Motor – Rs.11,00024. D.C. Compound Motor – Rs.13,00025. Squirrel Cage Motor – Rs.10,000From Fitter Workshop No.3: 26. Pillar Type Drill Machine – Rs.12,500 5APPLN.1739.2023.odtThe total 26 items were stolen away and the total estimatedvalue of all the stolen materials was Rs.2,43,500/-. Therefore, thereport was lodged against unknown person. 5The learned counsel for the applicant submits that theapplicant is falsely implicated in the crime. He is not involved in thecrime in any way. He pointed out that even the applicant has lodgedthe report dated 13th March, 2021 alleging that theft was committed inhis house on 10th March, 2021. His employer Ismail Syed, resident ofNandurbar, was suffering from serious illness. He, therefore, wentthere after closing his house by properly locking it. Ismail Syed diedon that night. He stayed there for entire night. On 12th March, 2021,he alone returned from Nandurbar to Dondaicha. Upon inspecting thecupboard, he saw that the central locker inside it was also open.When he checked the rexine cloth wallet of the gold items inside it wasmissing. He realized that somebody has committed theft in his house.The applicant therefore, lodged the report against unknown personthat the theft of gold and silver ornaments and other articles worthRs.1,65,000/- was committed. The learned counsel for the applicantsubmitted that such is the position of the applicant. He has no criminalantecedents. He is falsely implicated in the crime. There is noevidence against the applicant. The statements of witnesses are not 6APPLN.1739.2023.odthelpful to the prosecution to establish the alleged offence ofcommission of theft against this applicant. The memorandum andseizure Panchanama show that all the articles were seized from co-accused namely Shahruk Remhan Shah, Vishal Amrut Kadam andNoorya @ Noor Nisar Pinjari, who were identified by some witnesses.Only the car of the applicant is seized. Except that, there is noevidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminalantecedents. The stolen articles particularly two electric motors totalworth Rs.25,000/- are seized at the instance of accused Noorya @Noor Nisar Pinjari under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Helastly prayed to allow the application as there is no evidence againstthe applicant. 6The learned APP for the State strongly opposed theapplication and submitted that the applicant is involved in the seriouscrime. His vehicle was used for carrying the stolen articles. There isstrong evidence against the applicant. The applicant is running scrappurchase business. He lastly prayed to reject the application. 7Here, it is relevant to refer to the decision of theHonourable Supreme Court in Mohammad Wajid and Another Vs.State of U.P. and Another, reported in, 2023 SCC Online SC 951;2023 INSC 683, whereunder the Honourable Supreme Court held 7APPLN.1739.2023.odtthus:-“34.……. it will not be just enough for the Court to lookinto the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for thepurpose of ascertaining whether the necessary ingredientsto constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not. Infrivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a dutyto look into many other attending circumstances emergingfrom the record of the case over and above the avermentsand, if need be, with due care and circumspection try toread in between the lines. The Court while exercising itsjurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC or Article 226 ofthe Constitution need not restrict itself only to the stage ofa case but is empowered to take into account the overallcircumstances leading to the initiation/registration of thecase as well as the materials collected in the course ofinvestigation....”8A reference also can be made to the judgment in the caseof CBI Vs. Aryan Singh, reported in, 2023 SCC Online SC 379, inwhich the Honourable Supreme Court held as under:- “Para 10… As per the cardinal principle of law, at the stageof discharge and/or quashing of the criminal proceedings,while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C.,the Court is not required to conduct the mini trial.”9We have perused the report and the charge-sheet,particularly, the statements of witnesses and discovery and recovery 8APPLN.1739.2023.odtPanchanamas under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Thestolen articles are seized at the instance of Noorya @ Noor NisarPinjari. Only because the applicant is running a shop of scrap and it isalleged that he purchased those articles, there is no such evidenceagainst the applicant that he has purchased those stolen articleshaving knowledge that those were stolen articles. To establish theessential ingredients of Sections 379, 380, 395, 120-B, 412, 413, 201and 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, there is no reliable evidence.In such fact situation, we are of the view that if the applicant is directedto face the trial, it would certainly be an abuse of the process of Court.We are therefore, inclined to allow the application by exercising ourinherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the interest ofjustice to prevent the abuse of the process of Court. The application,therefore, deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following order:-O R D E RI.The application is allowed.II.The Crime No.45 of 2022, dated 3rd February, 2022,registered with Dondaicha Police Station, TalukaSindkheda, District Dhule, for the offences punishableunder Sections 379 and 380 of the Indian PenalCode, 1860 and the proceedings in RCC No.89 of2023, pending in the Court of learned JudicialMagistrate First Class, Dondaicha, for the offences 9APPLN.1739.2023.odtpunishable under Sections 379, 380, 395, 120-B, 412,413, 201 and 401 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,stands quashed as against the applicant. [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ]nga