1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3608 OF 2010 Syed Mohiyoddin Ahmed Sab ..APPLICANT -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra and another ..RESPONDENTS ......... Mr. H.I. Pathan, advocate for applicant. Mr. V. G. Shelke, A.P.P. for respondent no.1. ........ (CORAM : V.R.KINGAONKAR,J.) DATE : 13th September, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard. The application is for quashing of criminal proceedings instituted vide F.I.R. No.139/2010 registered at Degloor police station. 2. The information is furnished by informant Dr. Vilas Dhange. The F.I.R. Purports to show that the applicant abused the informant Dr. Vilas Dhange on the date of incident i.e. on 03.08.2010 at about 5.30 p.m. and assaulted him while he was on duty in the Sub-District Hospital at Degloor as a Medical Officer. The applicant submits that when he obtained the information under Right to Information Act then it is revealed to him that informant Dr.Vilas Dhange was not on duty and the patient was treated by 2 Dr.Chavan J.M. He has placed on record the copy of letter received by him from the Information Officer. 3. At this juncture itself, let it be made clear that the application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code is founded on the probable defence of the applicant. Whether, the informant was present in the hospital at the relevant time or not is a disputed question of fact. Mere information regarding the duty roster of the Medical Officer will not suffice the purpose so as to infer that the informant could not be on duty at the relevant time. The defence of the applicant can not be said sufficient ground to quash the F.I.R. If the Investigating Officer will find that the informant was not on duty and was not present in the hospital at the relevant time then the Investigating Officer may sent the final report to the Court as contemplated under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, the investigation can not be scuttled at the pre-mature stage only because some probable defence is available to the applicant on basis of the information received regarding the roster of duties. Hence, the application is dismissed. (V.R.KINGAONKAR) JUDGE gas/cri3608.10