1 CR.APL NO.4121/2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4121 OF 2006 1. Achyutrao s/o Sahebrao Sherkar, Age: 50 years, Occu: Business, r/o Sudhakar Nagar, Aurangabad. 2. Wachlabai w/o Achyutrao Sherkar, Age 45 years, Occu: Household r/o Sudhakar Nagar, Aurangabad. 3. Asaram s/o Anganrao Sherkar, Age 56 years, Occu: Agri. r/o Mategaon Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed. 4. Shankar s/o Prabhakar Bagade, Age 37 years, Occu: Agri. r/o. Majalgaon Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed. ...PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra (Through Police Station Dindrud Dist. Beed.) 2. The Superintendent of Police Beed Dist. Beed. 3. Ashabai w/o Vijyakumar Sherkar Age: 30 years Occ. Household r/o. Upali Tq. Wadvani Dist.Beed. ...RESPONDENTS ... Mr.Sudhir K.Chavan, Adv., for the applicant. Mr. V.H.Dighe, APP for State. Mr.P.V.Barde, Adv., for R.no.3. 2 CR.APL NO.4121/2006 ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:4-3-2011 *** PER COURT : 1. Heard. Execution of sale deed by Vijaykumar dt.20.11.2006 was felt to be a cheating by his wife. Consequently, she lodged report with Police on 17.12.2006 that her husband was taken away by the accused/respondents, he was confined at a secluded place and, by misrepresentation, his signatures were obtained on a concocted sale deed. 2. After lodging of the FIR, Vijaykumar himself appeared before the Police authorities on 18.12.2006 to inform that, on his own, he has presented himself to the Police Officer, he was not kidnapped by his brothers or anybody else, he has executed the sale deed by his own volition and received entire sale consideration which he has entrusted to the father-in-law and, thereafter, he has moved for excursion. He reiterated, his brothers did not cheat him. Even he did not visit his brothers at Aurangabad. He attributed falsity to his wife and even in-laws and informed that report is false. 3 CR.APL NO.4121/2006 3. It is curious, when the accused was taken in custody, he was produced before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, on 18.12.2006. The brother Vijaykumar himself appeared before the learned Magistrate, as per copy of his application, to inform that the contentions and claims made in the complaint are false. 4. In the light of these aspects of the matter, in the absence of any medical evidence to demonstrate any certification of mental illness or incapacitation of Vijaykumar to execute the sale deed, the prosecution initiated by his wife vide Crime No.213/2006, for an offense under Sections 365, 420, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC is sheer abuse of process of law. It is, in order to stiffle other claims and contentions, to settle scores in the family, she has adopted the said recourse. 5. Inherent powers under Section 482 can be exercised in the categories; viz. a) to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order this Code, or (b) to prevent abuse of the process of any court or, (c) otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This is a fit case where ends of justice would require interference. Consequently, the impugned proceedings are - 4 CR.APL NO.4121/2006 quashed. Application allowed. Rule made absolute in above terms. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/4121-06crapl