(1) CRI. APLN. 4088.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4088 OF 2010 Shankar S/o Vishwanathrao Yeote (Patil), Age : 48 years, Occu.: Service as Extention Officer (Panchayat), Panchayat Samittee, Biloli, District : Nanded APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. Ashish Jadhavar, Advocate h/f. Mr. N.P. Patil Jamalpurkar, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. D.V. Tele, A.P.P. for the respondent/State. ..... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 6TH DECEMBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. By this Application, the applicant seeks quashing of the F.I.R. dated 21.12.2005 wherein he has been named as the assailant alongwith other accused persons. It is alleged by the complainant that on 21.12.2005 at about 9.30 am, while he was travelling in an auto-rickshaw, Vijay and his brother including the applicant and others reached near the auto-rickshaw. They were armed with stumps of fire- (2) CRI. APLN. 4088.2010 wood. They addressed obscenities and abuses to him and asked him to get out of the auto-rickshaw. They allegedly assaulted him by means of firewood stumps. 2. It is contended that the applicant is falsely implicated by naming him in the F.I.R. The learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has filed certificate dated 31.12.2005 issued by the Sarpanch and Vice-Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat, Jiraga to show that he attended the monthly meeting and performed his duty as the Village Development Officer. 3. Having heard learned Advocate for the applicant and on consideration of the grounds stated in the Application, I find it difficult to entertain the Application. First, the Application is filed almost five years after the registration of the F.I.R. Secondly, the Application is based upon the probable defence of alibi which the applicant seeks to raise on basis of certificate issued by the Village Panchayat of which he himself is an Officer. Thirdly, the quashing of the F.I.R. is impermissible on basis of the defence which cannot be examined on (3) CRI. APLN. 4088.2010 the touchstone of the relevant material at such a premature stage unless the trial is held. 4. Considering the above reasons, the Application is dismissed in limine. Sd/- [V. R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp