Bombay High Court
Sanjay S/O. Santosh Ramteke vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O. ... on 29 October, 2018
Author: P.N.Deshmukh
Bench: P.N.Deshmukh, Swapna Joshi
1 apl572.17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.572 OF 2017
Sanjay s/o. Santosh Ramteke,
Aged about 37 years, Occ.
Business, r/o. Ward No.1,
Takalghat, Nagpur. .......... APPLICANT
// VERSUS //
1.The State of Maharashtra,
Through P.S.O., P.S., M.I.D.C.
(Butibori), Dist. Nagpur.
2.Shankar Kawduji Karnake,
Aged about 45 years, Occ.
Agriculture, r/o. Kanholibara
near Bajrangbali Temple,
Gondwana Wasti, Tah.Higna,
Distt. Nagpur. .......... RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 31/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2018 01:06:38 :::
2 apl572.17.odt
____________________________________________________________
Mr.A.S.Band, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr.S.J.Kadu, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1/State.
Mr.S.S.Meshram, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
____________________________________________________________
CORAM : P.N.DESHMUKH
AND
MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 29th October, 2018.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per P.N.Deshmukh, J) :
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for the parties.
2. This application is for quashing of F.I.R. registered by respondent no.1 vide Crime No.185 of 2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code on the basis of report of respondent no.2. During pendency of application, the issue is settled between the applicant and the Complainant/respondent no.2 and accordingly, they have placed on record Compromise Deed below pursis Stamp No.5060 of 2018. The Deed of Compromise is signed by applicant no.1 and the ::: Uploaded on - 31/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2018 01:06:38 ::: 3 apl572.17.odt Complainant i.e. Respondent no.2 as well as by the learned Counsels appearing for them. Parties are also present in the Court. Complainant accepted contentions in the said document by which the issue is settled on accepting amount of Rs.5,00,000/- from the applicant.
3. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh and Others .vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 has held that if the parties have settled the dispute and no element of public loss is involved, they can be permitted to compound the offence.
4. In the present case, parties above referred have settled the dispute between themselves as respondent no.2/Complainant has accepted amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as mentioned in the Deed of Compromise and has also filed on record affidavit to that effect and as such, has no objection for putting an end to the Criminal proceedings. In that view of the matter, we are inclined to allow the Criminal Application.
::: Uploaded on - 31/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2018 01:06:38 :::
4 apl572.17.odt Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (A) of the Criminal Application. No orders as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE [jaiswal] ::: Uploaded on - 31/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2018 01:06:38 ::: 5 apl572.17.odt ::: Uploaded on - 31/10/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 02/11/2018 01:06:38 :::