1 CR.APL NO.620/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.620 OF 2011 1. Dagadu Laxman Nikam, Age: 44 years, Occu: Agriculture, r/o Talpimpri, Tq. Gangapur, Dist. Aurangabad. 2. Anil s/o Mohan Nikam, Age: 21 years, Occu: Agriculture, r/o As above. ...APPLICANTS (Ori.Accused No.3 & 4) VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Investigation Officer, Waluj Police Station, Tq. Gangapur, Dist. Aurangabad. 2. Sheshrao Dagadu Shengule, Age: 45 years, Occu: Agriculture, r/o Plot No.53, Jai Bhavani Nagar, N-2, CIDCO, Aurangabad. ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr.R.V.Gore, Adv., for the applicants. Mr. K.S.Patil, APP for State. Mr.V.H.Solanke, Adv., for respondent no.2. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:28/2/2011 *** 2 CR.APL NO.620/2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr. R.V.Gore, learned Counsel for the accused/applicants. Notice. Learned A.P.P. and Mr. V.H.Solanke, Counsel for respondent no.2 original complainant Sheshrao Dagadu Shengule, who is present, waive service. Accused/applicant Dagadu Laxman Nikam and Anil s/o Mohan Nikam present. Identified by Counsel. 2. Heard. By FIR No.152/2010, dt. 25.12.2010, offense of theft under Section 379 read with Section 34 of IPC was registered with Waluj Police Station. After the FIR, the complainant realized the mistake that on 23.12.2010, there is no nexus and connection of the applicants/accused Nos. 2 Anil Mohan Nikam and also No.1 Dagadu Laxman Nikam and owing to confusion, he has arrayed them as accused. This is so informed to the investigator on Rs.100/- stamp dt.14.1.2011, as referred by respective Counsel. In addition, affidavit of Sheshrao Dagadu Shengule in this Court is given in which he confirms that it was because of mistake and confusion,he has impleaded present applicants as offenders in Crime No.I.152/2010 on 25.12.2010. Original complainant has urged to permit the parties to compound the matter in the interest of justice and to quash the proceedings. 3 CR.APL NO.620/2011 3. Considering nature of accusations and the affidavit filed before the Police Inspector and immediately before this Court, since the parties have patched up their inter se relations, the proceeding initiated by respondent no.2 (Cime No.I.152/2010) is quashed to the extent of present applicants. Application allowed. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/620-11crapl