Bombay High Court
Dyaneshwar Kisan Nankar vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Pso Ps ... on 13 September, 2024
Author: Vinay Joshi
Bench: Vinay Joshi
2024:BHC-NAG:10446-DB
Judgment apl 1324.24
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1324/2024
Dyaneshwar Kisan Nankar,
Aged about 40 yrs., Occ. Business,
R/o. Kinhi Naik, Chikhali,
Dist. Buldhana.
... APPLICANT
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra,
through PSO, PS Amdapur,
Dist. Buldhana.
2. XYZ Victim,
Crime No. 35/2021,
Amdapur, Dist. Buldhana.
... NON-APPLICANTS
---------------------------------
Mr. G. Ansari, Advocate for applicant.
Mr. A. Badar, APP for non-applicant No.1.
Mr. M. N. Ali, Advocate for non-applicant No.2.
----------------------------------
CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND
MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 13.09.2024.
Judgment apl 1324.24
2
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: VINAY JOSHI, J.) :
Heard.
2. Admit.
3. This is an application seeking to quash criminal
prosecution namely Sessions Case No. 24/2021 arising out of Crime
No. 35/2021 registered with Police Station Amdapur, Dist. Buldhana
for the offenc e punishable under Sections 376(1), 506, 452 of the
Indian Penal Code on account of merits as well as settlement.
4. The informant is married lady aged 26 years has lodged
report alleging offence of rape. It is her case that on 28.08.2020 in the
evening, she was alone at her house along with kids. Around 08.00
p.m., the applicant who is village Sarpanch came to her house and
under threat has sexually exploited her. On the very night, she has
disclosed the things to her husband, however he neglected. The
informant insisted for lodging report, but her husband did not
cooperate her. Later, she filed application to the Superintendent of
Judgment apl 1324.24
Police, but no cognizance was taken. Finally, on 28.01.2021 with the
assistance of some lady Advocates, she went to the Police Station and
lodged report. The Police have carried investigation and filed final
report. It is informed that yet the Trial Court has not framed charge.
5. The learned counsel appearing for applicant would submit
that it is purely a case of consensual relations. It is submitted that
since husband was knowing about the relations, he did not cooperate
for lodging report. Our attention has been invited to the bail order
passed by this Court, wherein the said aspect was considered.
Moreover, it is argued that for ulterior motive, after five months report
has been lodged. On the other hand, the learned APP resisted this
application by attracting our attention to the statement of victim
recorded by the Magistrate in terms of Section 164 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
6. It is submitted that the informant is a married lady having
two kids. She was having acquaintance with the applicant as resident
of same village. The informant stated that the alleged occurrence took
Judgment apl 1324.24
place on 28.08.2020. Though she has informed the things to her
husband, as per her own contention, the husband neglected. The said
very approach of the husband supports the defence argument that
there was possibility of consensual relations.
7. Though informant stated that after few days she has
applied to the Superintendent of Police, but the entire charge-sheet
does not bear a material to support said contention. It is apparent that
after long period i.e. five months from the alleged occurrence, report
has been lodged. The statement of husband has been recorded who
did not support the informant's contention made before the
Magistrate that husband desisted her from lodging the report.
8. The informant lady has filed affidavit-reply stating that she
has consensual relations with the applicant and now the matter has
been amicably settled. Apart, the applicant has also pointed out from
the bail order that in past, similar allegations were levelled by
informant against one Pramod Giri, in which, later he was acquitted.
Besides settlement, we have carefully examined the material on record
Judgment apl 1324.24
and submissions made by the rival. We do not see any plausible
explanation for such long delay of five months in lodging the report.
Despite knowing the thing at the very day, the husband did not
support the wife in lodging report. On the other hand, the applicant's
contention that it is a case of extra marital relations seems probable as
the husband has stated that he is desiring to take divorce.
9. In totality of circumstances, it is apparent that it was a case
of extra marital relationship. Moreover, the informant wife has
appeared and by reply stated about such relations. Since informant is
not interested to go with the prosecution, there are high chances that
she may not support the prosecution case.
10. Having regard to all above facts, continuation of
prosecution would be abuse of the process of Court. In order to
secure ends of justice, we deem it appropriate to invoke our inherent
powers. The learned counsel for applicant made a statement that the
applicant would deposit sum of Rs. 25,000/- for rotating the Police
Machinery.
Judgment apl 1324.24
11. In view of above, application is allowed. We hereby quash
and set aside criminal prosecution namely Sessions Case No. 24/2021
arising out of Crime No. 35/2021 registered with Police Station
Amdapur, Dist. Buldhana for the offence punishable under Sections
376(1), 506, 452 of the Indian Penal Code on account of merits as
well as settlement.
12. The applicant shall deposit sum of Rs. 25,000/- with the
Government Pleader Library, High Court Nagpur within a period of
two weeks from today.
13. Application stands disposed of in above terms.
14. Stand over to 27.09.2024 for noting compliance.
(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)
Gohane
Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 19/09/2024 15:28:52
