Bombay High Court
SRINIVASA RAYALU B.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
The Court quashed the FIR against the applicant on the basis of parity with the co‑accused whose proceedings were previously dismissed.
Summary
The applicant, Srinivasa Rayalu B., filed a criminal application seeking quashment of FIR No. 65/2022 registered under multiple sections of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, alleging that the FIR contains omnibus accusations without naming any accused. He relied on a prior judgment dated 25 June 2025 that quashed proceedings against co‑accused in similar applications, arguing that parity demands the same relief for him. The State opposed, contending that material recovered from the spot belonged to the applicant and that the allegations against him were distinct. The Court held that, even if the material belonged to the applicant, the nature of the allegations against all accused was essentially the same and that the earlier order establishing parity warranted quashing the FIR against the applicant. Accordingly, the application was allowed, resulting in the quashment of the FIR against the applicant.
Issues considered
- Whether an FIR containing omnibus allegations without naming the accused can be quashed on the ground of parity with co‑accused whose proceedings were previously quashed.
- Whether the recovery of material allegedly belonging to the applicant affects the validity of the FIR against him.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Prohibition Act — s. 103, 108, 65(f), 77, 81, 82, 83, 86(i), 90
Subjects
- quashment of FIR
- Maharashtra Prohibition Act
- omnibus allegations
- parity
- criminal procedure
- co‑accused
- material evidence
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:41781-DB
918-APPLN-4342-2022.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
918 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4342 OF 2022
Srinivasa Rayalu B.
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Another
Mr. A. K. Tiwari, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. A. R. Kale, APP for Respondents/State
CORAM :R.M. JOSHI, J
DATE :SEPTEMBER 10, 2026
P. C. :
1. Applicant seeks quashment of the FIR No. 65/2022 registered
with State Excise Department, Udgir, for the offences punishable under
Section 65(f), 77, 81, 82, 83, 86(i), 90, 103 and 108 of the Maharashtra
Prohibition Act and RCC No. 115/2023 pending before JMFC, Ahmedpur.
2. Learned Counsel for the Applicant drew attention of the Court
to the first information report, which according to him, indicates that there
are omnibus allegations without naming any accused persons. He drew
attention of the Court to order dated 25.06.2025 passed by this Court in
Criminal Applications No. 3586/2023 and 3589/2023 quashing proceedings
bearing RCC No. 115/2023 qua co-accused. It is his submission that having
regard to the nature of FIR role attributed against all accused is same and as
such, on parity, present Application deserves to be allowed.
3. Learned APP opposed application by contending that the
Page 1 of 2
918-APPLN-4342-2022.odt
allegations against all accused are different. It is his contention that the
material recovered from the spot is said to be belonging to present
Applicant.
4. Even if it is accepted for the sake of argument that the material,
which was found at the spot belong to the Applicant, as far as offence is
concerned, practically allegations against all accused are same. Since the co-
accused are granted relief by order dated 25.06.2025 in Criminal
Applications No. 3586/2023 and 3589/2023, this Court finds no
justification not to allow the present Application on parity. Hence,
Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.)
Malani
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…