LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/gopal-govind-lakade-anr-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-anr-20250506/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Gopal Govind Lakade & Anr. vs The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
6 May 2025
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 2483 of 2025
Result
Disposed
Bench
B.V. Nagarathna, Satish Chandra Sharma
Citation
[2025] 6 S.C.R. 307 : 2025 INSC 658
Supreme Court Reports [2025] 6 S.C.R. 307 : 2025 INSC 658
Issue for consideration
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court dismissing the application of the appellants seeking quashing of the complaint, and that too without issuing notice to respondents.
Headnote

Notices/Processes – Non-issuance of, by the court – Violation of natural justice – Criminal application by the appellants seeking quashing of complaint filed against them – High Court dismissed the application, and was not even inclined to issue notice to the respondents – Correctness:

Held: If the Division Bench of the High Court was not inclined to even issue notice to the respondents, then reasons ought to have been assigned for that purpose, or in the alternative, notice should have been issued to the respondents and after giving a fair opportunity to both sides, dismissed the complaint on merits – In the absence of any of the options being exercised by the Division Bench of the High Court, impugned order is in violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as no reason can be gathered as to why the High Court was not inclined to even issue notice to respondents in the application filed by the appellants seeking quashing of the FIR registered against the appellants – Impugned order set aside and matter remanded to the High Court. [Paras 6, 7]

Keywords: Quashing of complaint · Notice · Fair opportunity · Violation of principles of natural justice

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Order Leave granted. 2. Respondent no.2 has been served. However, there is no representation on behalf of respondent no.2. In the circumstances, we have heard learned counsel for the appellant(s) and learned counsel for the respondent/State. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant(s) drew our attention to the impugned order. For immediate reference, the impugned order dated 30.10.2023 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, in Criminal Application No. 2439/2023 is extracted as under “P.C. 1. After hearing the learned advocate for the applicants fo
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →