Bombay High Court
RONAK RAMKISAN GOKHLANI @ ROUNAK JAIKISHIN GOKLANEYversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The High Court exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the order permitting the lower court to frame charges under Sections 447 and 427 IPC and discharged the applicant.
Summary
The applicant filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash an order dated 8 December 2017 passed by the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Pune, which had permitted the Judicial Magistrate First Class Court No.9, Pune to frame charges under Sections 447 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code against him and to continue the criminal proceeding (RCC No.1667/2014). After hearing counsel for both sides, the High Court held that the order could be set aside using its inherent powers. Consequently, the Court quashed the order, discharged the applicant from the pending case, and disposed of the application. Detailed reasons were deferred due to time constraints. The decision underscores the Court's authority to intervene when a lower court's order is deemed improper or an abuse of process.
Issues considered
- Whether the order granting the JMFC Court liberty to frame charges under Sections 447 and 427 IPC is maintainable.
- Whether the High Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash such an order.
- Whether the applicant is entitled to discharge from the pending criminal proceeding.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 427, 447
Subjects
- Section 482 CrPC
- quash order
- charge framing
- IPC 447
- IPC 427
- discharge
- High Court
- Pune
Judgment
37.APL.28.2018.doc
HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.28 OF 2018
Ronak Ramkisan Gokhlani @ Rounak Jaikishin
Goklaney .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents
....................
Mr. Aniket Nikam a/w. Mr. Shvraj Dubele, Advocates i/by Mr.
Sumit Patil for Applicant.
Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for Respondent No.1.
Mr. Advait Tamhankar, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : AUGUST 21, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Nikam, learned Advocate for Applicant treadwell;
Ms. Phad, learned APP for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Tamhankar,
learned Advocate for Respondent No.2.
2. This is an Application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) seeking quashing and setting aside
of the order dated 08.12.2017.
3. After hearing submissions made by learned Advocates for the
respective parties, I am of the clear opinion that present Application
deserves to be allowed. Criminal Application is so allowed in terms of
prayer clause (i) which reads thus:-
“i. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly set aside/quash the
Order dated 8/12/2017 passed by the Ld.Principal District
1 of 2
37.APL.28.2018.doc
& Sessions Judge, Pune to the extent it grants liberty to
the the Ld. JMFC Court No. 9, Pune to frame the charge
under section 447 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code
against the Applicant and be further pleased to discharge
the Applicant as an accused from RCC No. 1667 / 2014
pending before the file of the Ld. JMFC Court No.9,
Pune;”
4. However, due to paucity of time detailed reasons could not
be given. The reasoned order shall follow.
5. Criminal Application is allowed and disposed.
H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by HARSHADA
HARSHADA HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date:
2026.08.21
19:39:22 +0530
2 of 2
Checking your session…