Bombay High Court
Rahul Sashi Kumar Nair vs The State Of Maharashtra on 27 July, 2022
Bench: Prakash Deu Naik
Ethape 1 7-WP-753-2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 753 OF 2021
Rahul Sashi Kumar Nair ...Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents
....
Mr. S. K. Nair a/w Reshma Kurle, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. Anil D,souza i/by D.G. Gujral for respondent No.2.
Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent - State.
Digitally signed
by
....
DNYANESHWAR
DNYANESHWAR ASHOK ETHAPE
ASHOK ETHAPE
Date:
2022.07.29
11:46:50 +0530
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE : 27th July, 2022
PC :
1. This petition was heard on 07.07.2022 and it was
closed for judgment. Subsequently at the request of
respondent No.2, the petition was listed for directions on
25.07.2022. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 (original
complainant) has tendered afdavit of respondent No.2. The
same is taken on record and marked 'X' for identifcation.
2. In the aforesaid afdavit dated 24.07.2022 it is stated
that FIR was lodged in 2015 and thereafter charge-sheet
was fled. The proceedings are pending since then. She is
settled in life. She had been pursuing the case since last
seven years. In the circumstances, she has decided to let
Ethape 2 7-WP-753-2021.doc
bygones be bygones. If the petitioner undertakes before
this Court not to come in contact and/or threaten or harm
her and her family members in any manner and expresses
his regret in respect of the incident leading to fling of the
captioned petition, she would consent to quashing
impugned order.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits on behalf
of petitioner that the petitioner in fact, denies the
allegations made against him in C.C. No. 1451 of 2016, but
considering the gesture made by the respondent No.2, the
petitioner expresses regret about any incident that might
have happened in the college and upset her. This is being
done considering the fact that the parties were students of
Law and continuing the proceedings would injure their
career and personal lives.
4. Leaned advocate for respondent No.2 submitted that
in the circumstances referred in afdavit, the aforesaid oral
statement of petitioner is acceptable to respondent No.2
and the proceedings against petitioner can be quashed.
5. The petitioner herein had challenged the proceedings
in C.C. No.1451/PW/2016 pending before the 60 th Court of
Ethape 3 7-WP-753-2021.doc
Metropolitan Magistrate at Kurla, Mumbai. The proceedings
were initiated on the basis of FIR lodged by respondent No.2
on 19.08.2015 vide C.R. No. 207 of 2015 for the ofence
punishable under Sections 354-A(i), 509 of the Indian Penal
Code. From the tenor of the FIR, the petitioner and
respondent No.2 were students and studying in VES law
college at Chembur.
6. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, the
impugned proceedings against the petitioner can be
quashed. The petitioner shall not cause any harm/threaten
the respondent No.2 or her family members.
ORDER
(i) Writ Petition No.753 of 2021 is allowed.
(ii) Order dated 15.06.2020 passed by learned
Metropolitan Magistrate 60th Court Kurla, Mumbai rejecting
application for discharge preferred by petitioner and the
proceedings in C..C No. 1451/PW/2016 pending before the
Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 60th Court Kurla, Mumbai
are quashed and set aside.
(iii) Writ Petition stands disposed of.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
