Amol v. Shaikh Mansoor Shaik Fayyaz,Age 44, Occu. Labourer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD (1)CR.APL.NO.2143/2012 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2143 OF 2012 Amol s/o Bharat Khairnar,Age 37 years, Occu. Service,Presently working as a Assistant Commissioner of Income Taxr/o E-1 Income Tax Colony,Khutwad Nagar, Kamat Wada,Nashik at Nashik. VERSUS ...APPLICANT Shaikh Mansoor Shaik Fayyaz,Age 44, Occu. Labourer,r/o Ganeshpuri Nagar, MehrunTq. & Dist. Jalgaon. ...RESPONDENT (complainant) ... Advocate for Applicant : Mr.Thoke Dhananjay BAPP for the State:Mrs. R.K.LaddhaRespondent served. ... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.Dated: January 24, 2013 ... PER COURT :- 1.Heard learned Counsel. 2.On 4.3.2011, process was issued against the accused/applicant for offence under Section 229-A of IPC for the reason of not causing appearance in Criminal Case No.1292/2008. Basically, in Criminal Case No.1292/2008, when IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABAD (2)CR.APL.NO.2143/2012 non bailable warrant was issued against the applicant, it was cancelled on 25.6.2010, on a fine of Rs.1,000/-. Another application was moved by the complainant Shaikh Mansoor to the learned Judge and the learned Judge having realized the situation of termination of non bailable warrant, did not agree to take action under Section 229-A of IPC. 3.It was not informed to the learned Judge on 4.3.2011 as to the earlier events and, consequently, the process is issued. Legal position is, once already an action is terminated for specific offence under Section 229A of IPC, the accused cannot be tried for the same offence. Article 20 of Constitution of India takes care of such situation. The process is quashed and set aside. Application allowed. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. )...