DEEPAK DILIP KHIVASARA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

(2.) This application is filed praying therein for quashing and setting aside the F.I.R. bearing C.R. No. 188/2013 registered with Pachora Police Station against the applicant.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that, the applicant was appointed as Auditor on 19th May, 2012 and as a matter of fact, on 29th May, 2012 he has accepted the appointment. It is submitted that, even if the allegations made in the First Information Report are taken at its face value and read in its entirety, no offence is disclosed as against the applicant. It is submitted that, so far allegation of preparation of forged record of service of Agenda on the complainant is concerned, the said allegations may be attributed against the coaccused, since those relates to period prior to the meeting dated 17th February, 2012 and 31st March, 2012. At the cost of repetition, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that, when the applicant was appointed first time as Auditor on 19th May, 2012 and accepted said appointment w.e.f. from 29th May, 2012, by no stretch of imagination, allegations can be attributed against the applicant that, he was involved in the preparation of service of Agenda showing prior date, though it was served on the complainant on 15th February, 2012 as alleged in the complaint. It is submitted that, even if the allegations made in the First Information Report are taken as it is, at the most the applicant has mentioned that, the complainant was not present for four consecutive meetings. Therefore, according to the learned counsel appearing for the applicant the application deserves to be allowed. He further submits that, on the same set of allegations, which are in the First Information Report, the complaint was filed by the complainant before District Deputy Registrar (Cooperative Societies), Jalgaon and said authority disposed of the said complaint and the applicant is exonerated.