1 18.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 351 OF 2023 1. Yuvraj Abhimanyu Valvi 2. Sandip Abhimanyu Valvi 3. Vasudeo Nimba Mistari 4. Harshal Abhimanyu Valvi ...Applicants VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. The Police Inspector 3. Kumudini Rupsing Valvi ...Respondents ... Advocate for Applicants : Mr. A. R. Syed APP for Respondent-State : Mr. S. P. Joshi, Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr. A. A. Joshi h/f Mr. S. V. Natu, ... ... CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 28.09.2026 ORDER : 1. The present Application is seeking quashment of FIR No. 400/2021 dated 09.06.2021 registered with Akkalkuwa Police Station, Dist. Nandurbar, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) so also quashment of charge sheet in R.C.C. No. 53/2022 pending before Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akkalkuwa. 2026:BHC-AUG:46339-DB 2 18.doc 2. The case of the prosecution is that the Secretary of the Satpuda Adivasi Lokseva Mandal, alleges that Accused No. 1 along with five other individuals, Accused Nos. 2 to 6 conspired with institutional office-bearers to fabricate fake appointment orders, resolutions, and official records. By misrepresenting themselves as validly appointed teaching and non-teaching staff at a secondary school in Navapada, the accused fraudulently siphoned off approximately 1 crore in ₹ government salary grants since 2008. Offenses were sought under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, and 120(B) of the IPC. Administrative inquiries conducted by education officials including the Extension Officer (Education) and Block Education Officer revealed a lack of documentary evidence establishing that Accused Nos. 1 to 4 were legitimately employed prior to recent years. Although government records acknowledge that the accused held certain roles during specific periods (e.g., 2018–2020), the legitimacy of their original appointments and eligibility remains in doubt. Finding sufficient prima facie evidence of record fabrication and illegal salary extraction, the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akkalkuwa, ordered the Akkalkuwa Police to register the FIR and investigate the matter under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. Pursuant to the said order FIR came to be 3 18.doc registered and investigated into. Since sufficient material was found to file chargesheet and accordingly the same is filed before competent court. 3. Learned Counsel for Applicants submit that the Applicants herein are duly appointed as teaching and non- teaching staff of the school run by the Trust and the detailed inquiry by the Education Department in relation to inclusion of names of present Applicants in Shalarth ID has attained finality and the complaint is filed to upset entitlement of present Applicants and depriving them from salary. It is further submitted that the complaint is filed as a result of the ongoing dispute in relation to the affair of the trust between the three factions of the trust and therefore, the criminal proceedings have been maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive of wrecking vengeance against the present Applicants. Lastly, it is submitted that the informant has arrived at a compromise with the Applicants and has filed affidavit recording no objection for allowing this Application. 4. To support his contentions, Learned Counsel for the Applicants relied on following judgements, Rajeshwarrao Vishwanathrao Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Bombay High Court, Criminal Writ Petition No. 507/2013), Priyanka Shrivastava and Anr. Vs. State of 4 18.doc Uttar Pradesh, (2015) 6 SCC 287, Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre and ors. (1988 AIR 709), M. N. Ojha and Anr. Vs. Alok Kumar Srivastav and Anr. (2009) 9 SCC 682. 5. Learned APP strongly opposed the grant of any relief to the Applicant considering the seriousness of the offences in question. He drew attention of this Court to the statements of witnesses recorded during the course of investigation and argued that FIR, statements of witnesses as well as the report by Deputy Director Education, Nashik Division show that there is a prima facie case and offence is made out against the Applicants. Thus, he argued that the Application deserves to be dismissed. 6. Learned Counsel for the Informant/ Respondent No. 3 submits that the Informant has arrived at a compromise with Applicants and he has no objection for allowing the present Application. For this purpose, he submitted that the Informant has filed an affidavit showing no objection to quashing of FIR and charge sheet by allowing the Application. Further, it is submitted that recording of no objection is aimed at smooth functioning of the trust and cannot be taken adversely. 5 18.doc 7. Perusal of the record, particularly the report of Deputy Director Education, Nashik division along with the statements of witnesses recorded during the course of investigation indicate that there is sufficient material to hold that prima facie offence is made out against the Applicants. Prima facie case against the Applicants and others concerned gets support from statements recorded during investigation of witnesses namely, Shivaji Jethya Valvi (at Pg. No. 92), Jijabrao Popatrao Bagul (at Pg. No. 159), Machhindranath Valmik Kadam (at Pg. No. 181), Ramesh Raghunath Desale (at Pg. No. 184) so also from the Report of Deputy Director, Education Department, Nashik Division (at Pg. No. 288). Therefore, as per the ruling and guidelines in State of Haryana and Ors. vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors. 1992 AIR 604, the present case is out of the scope of section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, since it would not be open for this court to consider correctness or otherwise of evidence on record and the same would be decided during trial. 8. The Informant who also happens to be the Founder Vice- President of the trust and Secretary in Schedule 1 filed an affidavit recording no objection for allowing this Application since the parties have arrived at a compromise and sought to convince this court that 6 18.doc there was no malafide interest or intention to extract any benefits. However, this court finds the said explanation to be lame and unacceptable. Furthermore, whenever the public money is involved and the offence affects the public at large, allowing the parties to compromise is not an appropriate course to adopt. Needless to say, that the informant individually did not sustain any loss and loss is said to have been caused to public exchequer. 9. There is no dispute about the fact that there are three factions in the trust running concerned educational institution and the change reports are pending. Often than seldom, it is seen that there are disputes between factions of trust and whenever the change reports are pending and parties invoke government machinery to lodge reports and arrive at compromise for their convenience and personal gains. The loss is unfortunately caused to the public at large since the public money is being utilized for this purpose. Exactly same thing has happened in the instant case. The informant lodges report alleging loss of public money and records no objection to allow Application, as per convenience. Thus, this court finds that the compromise and no objection filed by the informant does not deserve acceptance and lending validity to such compromise would encourage unscrupulous individuals to abuse 7 18.doc process of law. 10. Therefore, this court finds it to be a fit case to impose exemplary costs on the Informant. However, having regard to the age and gender of the Informant, a token cost of Rs. 21,000/- is imposed to be paid to the Government Cancer Hospital, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, within a period of four weeks from the date of passing of this order. 11. In view of the above, the Application stands dismissed. ( R. M. JOSHI, J. ) V.S.JOSHI