1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION No.2826 of 2009 (Manoj s/o Raghunath Jha vs. The State) -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr.R.K.Khandelwal, Adv., for the applicant. Mrs.B.R.Khekale, APP for respondent State. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE: 18/9/2009 P.C.:- 1. The accused/applicant Manoj seeks to quash proceedings vide Crime No.I-39/2009 registered at MIDC, CIDCO, Police Station, Aurangabad, for the offense under Sections 379 read with Section 34 of IPC. 2. Counsel submits, the accused Manoj is a student. He lost his precious academic year. He was, at the material time, working with a garage called Divekar Multi Services. The 2 accused has subsequently appeared in the examination and got through with accomplished marks. The Counsel urged, the accused is falsely implicated in the case on the statement of one of the accused. 3. The complainant Vaishakh on 17.3.2009 was moving on his motor bike near N-1, CIDCO, at Aurangabad. Two persons stopped him, seeking lift. Refusal has resulted in one of them snatching gold chain on the person of complainant Vaishakh. Vaishakh, with courage at his command, nabbed one person is identified as Salim Nasir Qureshi who was brought to Police Station with aid of others. During the course of investigation and communication with Salim names of three persons, associated with the crime, surfaced; one of them is applicant. The gold chain was recovered from one Nilesh Suresh Gabhane, residing at Deulgaon Mali, Tq. Mehkar, dist. Buldhana on 18.3.2009. 3 4. Considering the role attributed to the accused/applicant, it cannot be said that the prosecution is merely an abuse of process against the accused/applicant. 5. The high profile credentials of the accused, to be an employee or to have got good marks subsequently, by itself, will not be a ground to exercise discretion in terms of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. It cannot be said that the prosecution is to humiliate the accused or the complainant Vaishakh has some other reasons to press and squeeze the claims of the present accused. In the situation, such exercise of powers not warranted. Application rejected. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... agp/2826-09crapl