SHARAD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel for the parties. Perusal of the material on record reveals that though, initially a mistake was committed by the applicant by endorsing the mutation entry entered by the Talathi, it would reveal that he has immediately rectified the same by directing the cancellation of earlier entry. It is further to be noted that the responsibility of mutation entry is with the Talathi and not with the Circle Inspector. In any event, the applicant, who is personally present in the Court, states that though he had no role to play in recording of the earlier entry, he expressed his regret for the inconvenience which was caused to the respondent/complainant.

(2.) Taking into consideration the nature of allegations, we do not find that a case is made out for proceeding against the present applicant for the offences he is charged with. Perusal of the contents of the First Information Report would show that even taking the allegations in the First Information Report at its face value, no case is made out for the offences for which the First Information Report is registered, atleast against the applicant.

(3.) In view thereof, we are inclined to allow the application. The application is, therefore, allowed in terms of prayer clause (iii). Rule is made absolute accordingly. Needless to state that the respondent/complainant may proceed in accordance with law against rest of the accused persons. Criminal Application is disposed of.