( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2157 OF 2010 1. Ayub Khan Sabir Khan Pathan, R/o Galli No. 2, Habibiya Colony, Kiradpura, Aurangabad. 2. Mehtab Samad Khan Pathan, R/o Naigaon, Dist. Aurangabad APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through the Police Station Officer, Gondi Police Station, Dist. Jalna. 2. The Collector, Jalna. 3. The Tahsildar, Ambad. RESPONDENTS WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 142 OF 2010 1. Syed Muzzammil Ali s/o Syed Rashid Ali R/o 4/12/32/A, New colony, Roshan Gate, Aurangabad. 2. Sk. Nazim Sk. Mohd., R/o Katkat Gate, Nehru Nagar, Aurangabad. APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through the Police Station Officer, Gondi Police Station, Dist. Jalna. 2. The Collector, Jalna. 3. The Tahsildar, Ambad. RESPONDENTS WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 484 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 142 OF 2010 1. Syed Muzzammil Ali s/o Syed Rashid Ali R/o 4/12/32/A, New colony, Roshan Gate, Aurangabad. ( 2 ) 2. Sk. Nazim Sk. Mohd., R/o Katkat Gate, Nehru Nagar, Aurangabad. APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through the Police Station Officer, Gondi Police Station, Dist. Jalna. 2. The Collector, Jalna. 3. The Tahsildar, Ambad. RESPONDENTS .... Mr. Ajay S. Deshpande, advocate for the applicants in all the three applications. Mrs. B.R. Khekale, APP for the respondents in all the three applications. .... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 6th October, 2010] PER COURT : 1. Both the applications (cri. application No. 2157/2010 and cri. application No. 142/2010) are being decided together in as much as they arise out of same F.I.R. 2. The applicants seek quashing of FIR No. 2/2010, registered at Gondi Police Station (Taluka Ambad), to their extent. 3. Upon hearing learned advocate for the applicants and learned APP and on perusal of the investigation papers, it prima facie appears that the applicants were involved in ( 3 ) transportation of sand in the truck vehicles, bearing registration No. MH-21/6441 and MH-06/AC-490 - Tata. The applicant No. 1 in both the applications is the owner of the respective vehicle and the applicant No. 2 in both the cases is the driver of the respective truck vehicle. They allege that there is no substantive evidence to connect them with the alleged crime. They submit that they never had any knowledge about fabrication of the transport permit or receipts to excavate sand from riverbed of Godavari river at Walkeshwar. They submit that they have been implicated falsely and were being harassed by the police officers. 4. It appears that one Subhash Kudale manipulated false receipts and documents. Report of the Investigating Officer of State C.I.D., Aurangabad goes to show that Subhash Kudale managed to prepare false documents in order to take away the sand from riberbed. 5. The applicants are unconnected with the alleged offence committed by Subhash Kudale. They are only transporters of the sand. They could not have any tangible reason to suspect fabrication of the receipts or transport permits, which were shown to them by said Subhash Kudale. In ( 4 ) any case, there is no material placed on record to say that the applicants were having common intention with the main accused i.e. Subhash Kudale nor there is any evidence about conspiracy between them. In the absence of any criminal intention on the part of the applicants, they cannot be roped in as accused. 6. Considering the peculiar fact situation, the FIR to the extent of the present applicants be deemed as quashed though it may be continued in respect of the main accused i.e. Subhash Kudale, etc. The applications are accordingly allowed and disposed of in above terms. In view of disposal of these two applications, Criminal application No. 484/2010 also stands allowed and disposed of accordingly. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/criapln2157-142-10