Ajay S/O Pralhadrao Tantarpale ... vs State Of Mha. Thr. Pso Ps ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1174 Bom

                                             1/3                          35.apl1050.2022

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

             CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1050 OF 2022
                       Ajay s/o Pralhadrao Tantarpale and Ors.
                                         Vs.
          State of Maharashtra, Thru. PSO, PS Frezarpura, Amravati and anr.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders                                Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Mr. P.V. Navlani, Advocate for applicants.
                           Mr. S.S. Doifode, APP for non-applicant No.1.
                           Mr. P.V. Deshmukh, Advocate for non-applicant No.2.

                                        CORAM          : VINAY JOSHI, AND
                                                         VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.

                                        DATE           : 03.02.2023.


                                        Heard.

                           2.           On     oral     request,       learned      counsel

appearing for informant is permitted to score the name of informant from the affidavit.

3. Necessary amendment to be carried out forthwith.

4. The applicants' are seeking to quash FIR relating to offence punishable under Section 376(2)

(n) of the Indian Penal Code along with other offences.

Prity
                          2/3                    35.apl1050.2022

5. The applicants' are basically seeking to quash FIR as well as charge-sheet on merits by stating that the police papers does not discloses offence as alleged. It is contended that it was a long standing love affair and out of misconception, report has been lodged. In short, there was total absence of deceitful intent from inception and therefore, on merits, the proceeding is required to be quashed.

6. In addition to that, it has been submitted that the informant has realized about her misconception and therefore, she has filed affidavit stating that in peculiar facts, she do not want to prosecute the case. Today, informant (victim) is present and accompanied by her parents. The victim is identified by her Advocate Mr. P.V. Deshmukh.

7. We have verified the contents of affidavit, on which she understood fully and stated that she do want to prosecute the proceeding bearing Crime No.147/2022 and related case.

8. The State has objected to accept the settlement, since the offence is punishable under Section 376 (2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code.

Prity
                                                 3/3                   35.apl1050.2022

9. Both sides have requested time to make a submission on merits as well as to cite certain judgments in support of their respective stand.

10. Stand over to 07.02.2023.

                                        JUDGE                       JUDGE




Signed By:PRITY S GABHANE
Reason:
Location:

Signing Date:04.02.2023 13:46

Prity