Bombay High Court
Lankesh Netaji Londhe vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 7 November, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1 jg.apl 446.15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
Criminal Application (APL) No. 446 of 2015
Applicant : Lankesh Netaji Londhe
Aged about 28 years,
Occu. Service.
R/o Pardi, Ta. Gadchiroli
Dist. Gadchiroli.
// Versus //
Respondents : (1) State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Police Station Gadchiroli,
Dist. Gadchiroli.
(2) Sonia D/o Shamrao Gandate
Aged about 23 years,
Occu. Student
R/o Pardi, Ta. Gadchiroli,
Dist. Gadchiroli
Shri V. N. Morande, Advocate for the applicant
Shri D. P. Thakre, Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no. 1
None for the respondent no. 2
CORAM : R. K. DESHPANDE AND
M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATE : 7-11-2017.
JUDGMENT (Per : M. G. GIRATKAR, J.)
By the present application, the applicant prayed to quash and
set aside First Information Report registered vide Crime No. 71/2015 by
the respondent no. 1 for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and
506 of the Indian Penal Code on the report of the respondent no. 2.
.....2/-
2 jg.apl 446.15.odt
2. It is submitted that the respondent no. 2 lodged a false report
against the applicant. Prima facie, no offence is committed by the
applicant, hence prayed to quash and set aside the FIR registered vide
Crime No. 71/2015 by Police Station, Gadchiroli.
3. Respondent no. 2 remain absent though served. Respondent
no. 1 Police Station, Gadchiroli filed reply and submitted that as per the
report, crime was registered against the applicant.
4. Heard Shri Morande, learned counsel for the applicant. He
has pointed out documents i.e. reports lodged by the Respondent no. 2
dated 16-5-2015 and 29-9-2014, statement of respondent no. 2 dated
17-12-2014 recorded by Police Station Gadchiroli, Annexure A-4 and
notice issued by Advocate Shri Undirwade of Gadchiroli vide
communication, Annexure A-5.
5. Shri Morande, learned counsel has submitted that when the
marriage of applicant was settled, the respondent no. 2 started creating
trouble. Notice was issued by respondent no. 2. In the said notice, it is
mentioned that applicant is going to perform marriage with a girl of
Pandharpauni, Taluka Rajura, District Chandrapur.
6. Shri Morande, learned counsel pointed out her report dated
.....3/-
3 jg.apl 446.15.odt
29-9-2014. In the report, she has nowhere stated about the sexual
relation of applicant with her. She has stated in her statement dated
17-12-2014 that sexual relation with the applicant was with her consent
in love relation, therefore, she did not want to prosecute the applicant.
For the first time, she made allegations in the report dated 16-5-2015
stating that on 7-1-2009, the applicant did forcible sexual intercourse
with her and threatened her. Thereafter he promised to marry with her.
Learned counsel has submitted that this report dated 16-5-2015 is after
thought. She was in love. She wanted to marry with the applicant.
When marriage of applicant was settled, she issued notice and lodged a
false report dated 16-5-2015 with the advice of her counsel.
7. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri Thakre. He
has submitted that investigation is complete and charge-sheet is about to
file and therefore, he prayed to allow Criminal Application (APPP)
No. 1292/2017 for filing charge-sheet by the respondent no. 1.
8. From perusal of report of respondent no. 2, it is clear that
first incident of sexual intercourse took place on 7-1-2009. But she did
not disclose the said incident in her report dated 29-9-2014. In her
report dated 29-9-2014, she made allegations against the applicant that
on 15-9-2014, she was standing in front of her house at about 3.00 p.m.,
.....4/-
4 jg.apl 446.15.odt
applicant started abusing her without any reason. She was having
danger from the applicant. On this report, Police Station, Gadchiroli
started chapter proceedings. Police Station, Gadchiroli recorded her
statement on 17-12-2014. She has stated in her statement that she has
settled the matter before Tantamukti Samiti. She has stated in her
statement that sexual intercourse took place with her own consent in love
relations, therefore, she withdraw the complaint lodged against the
applicant.
9. It is clear from the notice dated 11-5-2015 that the
respondent no. 2 wanted to marry with the applicant. She issued notice
to applicant and the girl resident of Pandharpauni, Taluka Rajura,
District Chandrapur to whom the applicant was going to marry. By the
said notice, applicant was directed not to perform marriage with the girl
resident of Pandharpauni. After the notice dated 11-5-2015, respondent
no. 2 lodged the report dated 16-5-2015. Therefore, it is clear that
report is nothing but after thought and it is as per the advice of her
counsel.
10. Notice dated 11-5-2015 was issued by Advocate Undirwade
of Gadchiroli. Prima facie, it appears that the report dated 16-5-2015
appears to be lodged only to harass the applicant. Had it been, there was
.....5/-
5 jg.apl 446.15.odt
a really a case of rape as alleged by her, then she would have stated in
her report dated 29-9-2014, Annexure A-2. Her statement dated
17-12-2014 clearly show that her sexual relation was with her own
consent in love relation and therefore, she withdrawn the report lodged
against the applicant.
11. Prima facie, offences alleged by the respondent no. 2 are not
made out. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal 1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335, FIR is
liable to be quashed and set aside. Hence, we pass the following order.
(i) The criminal application is allowed in terms of prayer
clause (1) and we quash and set aside FIR registered vide
Crime No. 71/2015 with respondent no. 1 by the respondent
no. 2 against the applicant.
(ii) No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
wasnik
...../-
