Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Phulajirao s/o Kondiba Hiras, filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. The petition sought two main reliefs: first, a direction to respondent no. 5 (Police Station Officer, Vasmat) to register an offence based on the petitioner's report dated 3.8.2006; and second, quashing of the first information report that led to Crime No. 33 of 2006 registered at Jintoor police station under Sections 392, 411 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. During the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail alternate remedies. Specifically, in respect of the first prayer, the petitioner sought liberty to file a private complaint case against the respondents for the offences disclosed in his complaint dated 3.8.2006. In respect of the second prayer, the petitioner sought liberty to file an appropriate application before the learned Trial Court seeking discharge from the offences. The court, comprising Justices P.V. Hardas and Shrihari P. Davare, allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the petition with the liberty as prayed for. Rule was discharged. No other issues were considered on merits.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Withdrawal of Petition - Liberty to Avail Alternate Remedies - Petitioner sought registration of FIR and quashing of another FIR under Sections 392, 411 r/w 34 IPC - Court permitted withdrawal with liberty to file private complaint and to seek discharge before trial court - Held that petitioner may withdraw petition with such liberty (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail alternate remedies including filing a private complaint and seeking discharge.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to avail alternate remedies, including filing a private complaint and seeking discharge before the trial court. Rule stands discharged.
Law Points
- Withdrawal of petition
- liberty to file private complaint
- liberty to seek discharge
- alternate remedies
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 127
Criminal Writ Petition No. 593 of 2006
P.V. Hardas, Shrihari P. Davare
Shri Omprakash Y. Kashid (for petitioner), Shri S.D. Kaldate (APP for respondents)
Phulajirao s/o Kondiba Hiras
The State of Maharashtra, The Special Inspector General of Police, Nanded Range, The Superintendent of Police, Hingoli, The Superintendent of Police, Parbhani, Police Station Officer, Vasmat
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction to register FIR and quashing of another FIR.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a writ directing respondent no. 5 to register an offence based on his report dated 3.8.2006, and quashing of FIR in Crime No. 33 of 2006 under Sections 392, 411 r/w 34 IPC.
Filing Reason
Petitioner alleged that police failed to register an offence on his complaint and that a false FIR was registered against him.
Issues
Whether the petitioner should be permitted to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail alternate remedies.
Submissions/Arguments
Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a private complaint case against the respondents for offences disclosed in the complaint dated 3.8.2006, and with liberty to file an application for discharge before the trial court.
Ratio Decidendi
A petitioner may be permitted to withdraw a criminal writ petition with liberty to pursue alternate remedies such as filing a private complaint or seeking discharge before the trial court, without the court adjudicating on the merits.
Judgment Excerpts
After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner states on instructions that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to avail the alternate remedies available to the petitioner in law in respect of filing private complaint case against the respondents for the offences which are disclosed in the complaint of the petitioner dated 3.8.2006.
We accordingly dismiss this petition with liberty as prayed for. Rule stands discharged.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 593 of 2006 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench. During the hearing on 18.01.2010, the petitioner sought and was granted permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail alternate remedies. The petition was dismissed accordingly.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 392, 411, 34
- Constitution of India, 1950: Article 226
