2016 ALL MR (Cri) 5048


Saurabh s/o. Vijay Kumar Kurvey & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

Criminal Application (Apl) No.781 of 2015

4th April, 2016.

Petitioner Counsel: Mr. R.M. DAGA
Respondent Counsel: Mr. V.P. GANGANE, A.P.P., Ms NEERJA CHOUBEY

Criminal P.C. (1973), S.482 - Penal Code (1860), Ss.394, 34 - Quashing of FIR - Amicable settlement - Allegations of stealing certain amount and goods of first informant - Dispute ensued between parties after accidental collision of their vehicles - First informant himself stated that he lodged FIR due to refusal of applicants to pay compensation - No element of public law involved - FIR lodged on account of misunderstanding - Liable to be quashed. 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 3942 (S.C.), 2008 ALL SCR 775 Rel. on. (Paras 3, 5, 7)

Cases Cited:
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Anr., 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 3942 (S.C.) [Para 6]
Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, 2008 ALL SCR 775=(2008) 4 SCC 582 [Para 6]


B. R. Gavai, J. :- Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent.

2. The applicants have filed present Criminal Application u/s.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing F.I.R. No.158 of 2015, dt.26.6.2015 registered by Police Station, Kalmeshwar, District Nagpur against them.

3. The F.I.R. is lodged for the offences punishable under Section 394 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that there was a dash in between the vehicle i.e. Tata Ace of the first informant and Wagon R vehicle bearing registration No.MH-31 AK 1185 of the applicants/accused. After the dash, the present applicants stole certain amounts from the pocket of the first informant and also certain other goods from his vehicle.

4. It appears that, though the F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons, on the basis of number of the vehicle of applicants, the present applicants were arrested and were immediately released on bail.

5. In the present case, an affidavit was filed by the first informant stating therein that the said F.I.R. was lodged in the Police Station by him on account of misunderstanding since he refused to pay compensation for the loss caused to the vehicle of the applicants.

6. The Apex Court in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 3942 (S.C.) and Madan Mohan Abbot .vs. State of Punjab reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582 : [2008 ALL SCR 775] has held that if the dispute between the parties is amicably settled and there is no element of public law involved, this Court can exercise powers u/s. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to give an end to the Criminal proceedings.

7. We find that no element of public law is involved in the present matter. The F.I.R. appears to have been registered on account of misunderstanding between the parties. We, therefore, find that this is a fit case to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Rule is, therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (1) of the instant Criminal Application.

Needless to state that the subsequent proceedings shall also stand quashed and set aside.

Application allowed.