1 CR.WP NO.830/2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.830 OF 2009 Bajirao s/o. Hiraman Patil, Age 50 years, Occu: Agril. r/o. Chinchkheda, Tq. & Dist. Dhule. ..PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra. 2. Ramesh s/o Mansaram Patil, Age: 40 years, Occu:Agril., r/o. Anchale, Tq.& Dist. Dhule. ...RESPONDENTS (Resp. No.2 Orig. complainant) ... Mr.Joydeep Chatterji, Adv.,h/f Mr. A.M.Gaikwad, Adv., for the petitioner. Mr.P.P.More, APP for State. Mr. A.S.Sawant, Adv., for Respondent no.2. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:June 17th, 2011 *** PER COURT : 1. Heard. The accused/applicant has prayed to quash his impleadment as accused in Crime No.20/2009, dt.3rd Feb.,2009, and set aside the orders passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 2 CR.WP NO.830/2009 First Class, Amalner, on an application moved below Exhs.28 and 32, respectively, dt.12.8.2009, 24.8.2009, in terms of Section 169 of Cr.P.C. 2. On 3rd Feb.,2009, on Chopada Amalner Road, dead body of an unknown person was found lying, with injuries on both the legs. It was felt that such death could be due to accident or due to dash given by some vehicle. Name of deceased was ascertained from documents to be Hanumantrao Mansaram Patil r/o Anchale, Tq. and Dist. Dhule. Investigation resulted in registration of Crime No.20/2009 under Sections 209,338, 304-B of IPC. Thereafter, Ramesh Patil, brother of the deceased gave statement before the Police, stating that his brother Hanumant, had been to Dhule, with Rs.15,000/- having obtained from him, along with Ramesh Shenpadu Patil, on motor cycle. 3. It revealed that the deceased was seen with Abhiman Bhivsan Patil, Daga @ Namdeo Patil. All the persons were under influence. They had acted at the instigation of Bajirao Hiraman Patil. Abhiman Patil faced sessions trial vide Sessions Case No.30/2009, he was acquitted by judgment and order dt.25/26th March, 2010, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, at Amalner. The Division Bench endorsed the acquittal in Criminal Appeal No.326/2010 on 25th Oct.,2010. 3 CR.WP NO.830/2009 4. In the final report tendered by the Police before the Court, inadvertently, name of the present applicant was shown as absconding and action under Section 299 Cr.P.C. was shown to be contemplated. 5. The Police realized the mistake and on 12.8.2009 report was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, to delete name as he was wrongly shown as absconding. The investigator informed the learned Judge that there was no evidence and the name was involved by some persons due to personal grudge, since there was nothing to book him. 6. The learned Judge did not accede to the request to the extent of applicant Bajirao, however, he permitted to delete another person. 7. Mr. Sawant, learned Counsel for the original complainant, submits that slackness on the part of the investigator has caused mist in the matter and its benefit is given to the accused/ suspects. To emphasize his point, he read statement of one of the witness, namely, Rambhau Gobru Pawar. He implicates, to some extent, to the applicant Bajirao being person seen quarreling with the deceased one day earlier to the event. 4 CR.WP NO.830/2009 8. Emphasis to the statement of Rambhau is inconsequential as, in the ongoing Sessions Case No.30/2000, he was a prosecution witness and examined as PW No.5, did not attribute anything against the present applicant Bajirao. Had there been any event, the learned Sessions Judge was with competence in terms of Section 319 of Cr.P.C. to take action. This indicates, there was no material against the accused/applicant Bajirao to face the trial. The request made by the investigator on two occasions referred here- in-before to delete the accused/applicant from the array of the accused in the said case, was just, was not weighed with any extraneous consideration, to feel that inspite of applicant being involved, prosecution desires to shield him. 9. Taking survey of above aspects, I find, the rejection of the two applications by the learned Judge, moved in terms of Section 169 of Cr.P.C. was uncalled for. There was no material to prosecute and proceed against the accused/applicant in Crime No.20/2009/Sessions Case No.30/2009 and, consequently, the request to take action in terms of Section 169 Cr.P.C. being legal and proper, the proceedings are dropped, quashed against the accused/applicant. 5 CR.WP NO.830/2009 Writ Petition allowed to the extent of accused/applicant. Rule made absolute in above terms. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... agp/830-09crwp