VASANT RAMBHAU THORWEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2026:BHC-AUG:39455-DB
                                                                              Format.odt



                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                           CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1116 OF 2024

                                VASANT S/O RAMBHAU THORWE
                                           VERSUS
                         THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

          Mr. S. G. Kawade, Advocate for the Applicant.
          Mr. S. B. Jadhav, APP for Respondent-State.

                                                           CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J
                                                           DATE  : AUGUST 27, 2026

          P. C. :

          1.            Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the

          respondent-State.


          2.            By the present application under Section 482 of the Code of

          Criminal Procedure, the applicant seeks quashing and setting aside of Crime

          No.0030/2024 registered with Police Station Mantha, District Jalna, for the

          offences punishable under Sections 385 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

          The applicant has also sought consequential relief in respect of the

          proceedings arising out of the said crime.


          3.            The applicant is aged about 55 years and is serving as an

          Assistant Teacher at Jaibhavani High School, Jaipur, Tq. Mantha, District

          Jalna. The informant is Shivaji Tryambakrao Thorwe. The allegations in the

          First Information Report, in substance, are that the applicant contacted the


                                             Page 1 of 7
                                                                            Format.odt



informant on his mobile phone in connection with the works undertaken

through the Gram Panchayat. It is alleged that the applicant demanded

money in respect of such works and threatened the informant in case the

demand was not complied with. On the basis of the said allegations, Crime

No.0030/2024 came to be registered with Police Station Mantha for the

offences punishable under Sections 385 and 506 of the Indian Penal

Code.The applicant has disputed the allegations made in the First

Information Report. It is his case that there was political rivalry and previous

enmity between the applicant and the informant's family. The applicant

states that he was elected as a member of the Gram Panchayat and that the

wife of respondent No.2 was the Sarpanch of the said Gram Panchayat.

According to the applicant, he had raised objections regarding the works

undertaken by the Gram Panchayat and had approached the concerned

authorities seeking enquiry.


4.           The   applicant    has      placed     on   record   copies     of    the

complaints/applications filed before the concerned authorities. These

documents are collectively marked as Exhibit “A”. The record shows that the

applicant   had     approached        authorities    including    the      Divisional

Commissioner, District Collector, Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad and

Block Development Officer in relation to the works undertaken by the Gram

Panchayat and had sought enquiry in respect thereof. According to the



                                      Page 2 of 7
                                                                    Format.odt



applicant, because of the complaints made by him against the Sarpanch and

Gramsevak, the present FIR has been filed as a counterblast. He has

specifically contended that the Sarpanch, who is stated to be the wife of

respondent No.2, had misused the power of her office and, therefore, the

applicant had made complaints before the Government authorities. It is his

contention that the present complaint is false, bogus and fabricated. The

applicant has further relied upon the attendance register of the school,

which is produced on record and marked as Exhibit “C”. He has contended

that the attendance register shows his presence in the school on 09.09.2023.


5.          The applicant has also relied upon the certificate issued by the

Head Master, Jaibhavani High School, Jaipur, dated 15.02.2024, which is

marked as Exhibit “D”. As per the said certificate, the applicant was present

in the school on 09.09.2023 from 09.30 a.m. to 12.30 p.m. The copy of the

First Information Report bearing Crime No.0030/2024 dated 24.01.2024 is

produced on record and marked as Exhibit “B”. The FIR records Sections

385 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as the offences alleged against the

applicant. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that there is

considerable delay in lodging the FIR. According to the applicant, the

alleged incident occurred in September 2023, whereas the FIR came to be

registered on 24.01.2024. It is submitted that the delay of about four

months has not been properly explained and that the FIR is an afterthought,



                                  Page 3 of 7
                                                                    Format.odt



filed to counter the complaints made by the applicant against the Sarpanch

and Gramsevak. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant was

present in the school and relies upon the attendance register and the

certificate issued by the Head Master in support of his contention. It is

submitted that the documentary material placed on record creates a serious

doubt regarding the allegations made against the applicant.


6.          It is also the contention of the applicant that the FIR does not

contain any allegation regarding use of caste-related words and, therefore,

according to him, no offence under any such provision is attracted. The

applicant further contends that the police authorities did not conduct proper

enquiry before registering the crime and that the prosecution has been

initiated only on the basis of the informant's statement. Learned counsel for

the applicant has also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604, and submitted

that the present case falls within the principles warranting exercise of

inherent jurisdiction for preventing abuse of the process of law.


7.          Learned APP appearing for the respondent-State opposed the

application. It is submitted that the allegations made in the FIR are

supported by the statements of the witnesses recorded during the course of

investigation. It is further submitted that whether the witnesses are

interested witnesses or otherwise is a matter which can be considered by the


                                   Page 4 of 7
                                                                      Format.odt



Trial Court on appreciation of evidence.


8.          The applicant has relied upon the complaints filed by him

before various authorities, which are collectively marked as Exhibit “A”. The

said complaints may indicate that there was a dispute between the parties in

relation to the affairs and works of the Gram Panchayat. However, the mere

existence of such previous complaints cannot, by itself, establish that the

allegations made in the FIR are false. The applicant has also relied upon the

attendance register and the certificate issued by the Head Master. These

documents have been placed on record in support of the defence of the

applicant. Thus, it becomes the defence of the applicant, which may be

allowed to be raised during trial. The effect and evidentiary value of these

documents vis-à-vis the allegations made in the FIR and the statements

recorded during investigation cannot be conclusively determined in the

present proceedings. The applicant has mainly relied upon the delay in

lodging the FIR. The record indicates that the FIR was registered on

24.01.2024 in respect of an alleged incident stated to have occurred in

September 2023. However, the question as to the effect of such delay and

whether the delay has been properly explained or not is a matter which can

be considered by the Trial Court on the basis of the evidence before it.


9.          The contention that the FIR is a counterblast to the complaints

filed by the applicant also involves disputed questions of fact. The previous


                                   Page 5 of 7
                                                                     Format.odt



complaints relied upon by the applicant and the allegations made in the FIR

will have to be considered in the light of the evidence led by the respective

parties. So far as the contention regarding the witnesses is concerned, the

allegations in the First Information Report are supported by the statements

of the witnesses. Whether these witnesses are interested witnesses or

otherwise would be a matter to be decided by the Trial Court only. At this

stage, this Court cannot assess the credibility of the witnesses or decide the

evidentiary value of their statements. Likewise, this Court cannot, in

exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, undertake a detailed appreciation of the attendance register,

Head Master's certificate, previous complaints and other material relied

upon by the applicant and record a finding regarding the correctness of the

defence version. Such an exercise would amount to conducting a mini-trial.

The contention of the applicant that the police did not conduct proper

enquiry and that the FIR was registered only on the basis of the informant's

statement also cannot, in the facts of the present case, be examined so as to

terminate the prosecution when the material collected during investigation

includes statements of witnesses supporting the allegations.


10.         The applicant's reliance upon the judgment in Bhajan Lal

(supra) has been considered. However, on the material placed before this

Court, this is not a case where the allegations and the material collected



                                  Page 6 of 7
                                                                     Format.odt



during investigation can be said to be such that the continuation of the

proceedings would clearly amount to abuse of the process of law. At this

stage, this Court is not required to determine whether the prosecution will

ultimately succeed or whether the defence of the applicant will be accepted.

Those questions are required to be considered by the learned Trial Court

after appreciation of the evidence. Thus, merely because there is delay in

lodging the FIR, or because the applicant has placed on record previous

complaints and documents in support of his defence, the criminal

proceedings cannot be quashed when the allegations in the FIR are

supported by statements of witnesses. In view of the above, this Court finds

that the present proceedings cannot be quashed at this stage. The issues

raised by the applicant, including the effect of delay, previous complaints,

the defence documents and the credibility of the witnesses, are matters for

consideration by the learned Trial Court. Suffice it to say that applicant has

failed to make out case for quashing of criminal proceedings under

principles/guidelines laid down in case of Bhajan lal (Supra)


11.          In view of above discussion, the Criminal Application stands

dismissed.


                                                     (R. M. JOSHI, J.)
Malani




                                  Page 7 of 7