Bombay High Court
Bhupendra S/O Yesu Karade And Another vs State Of Maharashtra Through P. S. O. ... on 9 January, 2017
Author: B.R. Gavai
Bench: B.R. Gavai
1 APL.547.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 547 OF 2016.
1] Bhupendra s/o Yesu Karade,
Aged about 35 years, Occ. Private,
2] Yesu s/o Shyamji Karade,
Aged about 70 years,
Both 1 & 2 are R/o Plot No. 90,
Kolhe Layout, In front of Deepak
Steel Centre, Dattawadi, Nagpur..... APPLICANTS.
....Versus....
1] The State of Maharashtra,
through P.S.O. Wadi, Nagpur.
2] Jaya w/o Bhupendra Karade (Dead),
a) Sushila wd/o Janrao Okate,
Aged about 55 years, Occ. Household,
b) Sunil s/o Janrao Okate,
Aged about 35 years, Occ. Agriculture,
Both 2 a) & b) are R/o Police Station
Linga, Distt. Chindwada (M.P.)...... RESPONDENTS.
Mr. Namit Ram Kanungo, Advocate for applicants,
Mr. S.J. Kadu, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent no.1.
Ms. Ayesha Rizwy, Advocate for respondent nos. 2(a) & 2(b).
CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
DATED : JANUARY 9, 2017.
::: Uploaded on - 18/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 12:37:47 :::
2 APL.547.16.odt
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER B.R. GAVAI, J.)
1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties finally by consent.
2] The applicants have approached this Court for quashing the proceedings pending before the learned 25th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur bearing Regular Criminal Case No. 4502/08.
3] The applicant no.1 was married with one Jaya on 5.6.2005. However, it appears that there were certain disputes between the applicant and his wife and as a result of which the said Jaya lodged an FIR vide Crime No. 87/08 for the offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on 18.4.2008. Pursuant to the investigation, charge-sheet is already filed.
4] It appears that during the pendency of the said proceedings, the said Jaya died. After the death, the matter was amicably settled between the applicants and the mother and brother of the deceased.
::: Uploaded on - 18/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 12:37:47 :::
3 APL.547.16.odt 5] The applicant and the said Jaya are blessed with one daughter. The daughter is residing with the applicant nos. 2(a) and 2(b). On account of the settlement between the parties, the parties filed an application for compounding of the matter before the learned trial Judge. However, since the offence under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code is not compoundable, the learned Judge could not pass the orders thereupon. Hence, the present petition. 6] When the matter was listed before this Court on Friday, i.e. 6.1.2017, the respondent nos. 2(a) & 2(b) were personally present in the Court. They were interviewed by us. They have stated that they have no grievance subsisting against the applicants and they do not propose to continue with the matter.
7] On a specific query as to what the applicant no.1 proposes to do for upbringing of his daughter, who is residing with respondent nos. 2(a) & 2(b), the applicant stated that he would pay an amount of Rs.2000/- per month for the maintenance of his minor daughter Varsha. An undertaking has also been filed today duly signed by the applicants. It has been stated that prior to 10 th of every month, an amount of Rs.2000/- would be credited to the account of the non- applicant no. 2(a). It is further stated in the undertaking that an ::: Uploaded on - 18/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 12:37:47 ::: 4 APL.547.16.odt amount of Rs.50,000/- would be deposited in the Fixed Deposit in the Nationalized Bank situated at village Linga in the name of the minor daughter within a period of three weeks from today. 8] The undertaking is taken on record, treated as an undertaking to this Court and marked 'X' for identification. The undertaking is accepted.
9] It could thus be seen that no purpose would be served in keeping the present proceedings pending. The non-applicant nos. 2(a) and 2(b) who are the mother and brother of the deceased are not interested in continuing with the prosecution. If the said witnesses do not support the prosecution case, the result of the prosecution case would be obvious. We find that the continuation of the present proceedings would result in nothing else but adding one more matter to the already huge pendency.
10] The Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab & another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 has laid down certain guidelines for exercising the powers for quashing the complaints under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. One of the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court is that this Court ::: Uploaded on - 18/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 12:37:47 ::: 5 APL.547.16.odt should examine as to whether there is a remote possibility of conviction being made if the said case comes for trial. In the present case, we find that since the non-applicant nos. 2(a) and 2(b) are not desirous of prosecuting the criminal case, there is not even the remotest possibility that even if the trial proceeds, the same may culminate in conviction.
11] In that view of the matter, we are inclined to allow the application. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (i).
However, the matter is directed to be kept after a period of four weeks so as to report compliance of the Fixed Deposit amount of Rs.50,000/-.
JUDGE. J
UDGE.
J.
::: Uploaded on - 18/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 27/08/2017 12:37:47 :::