Bombay High Court
Satyam Shivam Arunkumar Jha vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 25 June, 2025
Author: A. S. Gadkari
Bench: A. S. Gadkari
2025:BHC-AS:27679-DB
rsk 29-APL-566-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.566 OF 2025
Satyam Shivam Arunkumar Jha
Aged: 27 years, Occ: Service
Presently residing at:
D-1404, V. J. Yashwin, Hinjewadi II,
Pune-411 057
Permanent residence address:
S/o Arun Kumar Jha
Village Khajuri, District Madhubani,
Bihar-847408 ... Applicant
V/s.
1.The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Chaturshringi Police
Station, C.R. No.786 of 2024)
2. XYZ
Chaturshringi Police Station,
Ganesh Khind Road, in front of Raj Bhavan,
Pune 411007. ... Respondents
_______________________________________
Mr. Gaurav Shenoy for Applicant.
Smt. Savita M. Yadav, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1-State.
_______________________________________
1/5
::: Uploaded on - 09/07/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 19/07/2025 00:49:30 :::
rsk 29-APL-566-2025.doc
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 25th June 2025.
JUDGMENT:
(Per A. S. Gadkari, J.)
1) By the present Application, under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the
Applicant is seeking quashing of C.R. No.786 of 2024 dated 4 th October 2024
registered with Chaturshringi Police Station, Pune, for the offences
punishable under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), 377, 354, 417, 504 and 506 of
the Indian Penal Code and the chargesheet filed therein after conclusion of
investigation.
2) Heard Mr. Shenoy, learned Advocate for the Applicant and Smt.
Yadav, learned APP for Respondent No.1-State. Perused chargesheet.
3) Respondent No.2, the victim, has filed aforenoted crime against
Pratik (accused No.1 ) and Applicant (accused No.2). The allegations against
the applicant are, as contemplated under Section 354 of the Indian Penal
Code.
4) It is a prosecution case that Pratik and Respondent No.2 were in
relationship. Pratik gave promise to marry Respondent No.2 and established
physical relations, despite her protest. The Respondent No.2, Pratik and
Petitioner subsequently started residing in a premises in a building situated
at Pashan, Pune. Applicant being friend of Pratik also used to stay along
with Pratik and Respondent No.2 in the said premises. It is categorically
rsk 29-APL-566-2025.doc
alleged by the Respondent No.2 that in the month of July 2022, the date she
did not remember, when Respondent No.2 was alone in the kitchen, the
Applicant entered therein touched her inappropriately and demanded sexual
favours from her. It is therefore alleged that an offence under Section 354 of
the Indian Penal Code is committed by the Applicant.
5) Learned Advocate for the Applicant submitted that, the
Respondent No.2 has not given specific date and time of the month of July
2024 when the alleged offence was committed by the Applicant. He
submitted that, the said offence was registered out of vengeance as the
Respondent No.2 was harbouring a belief that, it is due to the Applicant her
relations with Pratik got soured. He submitted that though the alleged
offence was committed in the month of July, the present crime is registered
after a lapse of about 3 months. He submitted that, the applicant has been
falsely implicated for the said reason and therefore crime against him may be
quashed.
6) The fact regarding allegations attracting Section 354 against the
applicant as noted in para No.5 above is deciphered from the F. I. R. itself.
Prima facie we find that there is no reason to disbelieve the statement of
prosecutrix.
6.1) The Supreme Court in the case of Bharwada Bhoginbhai
Hirjibhai vs State of Gujarat reported in AIR 1983 Supreme Court 753 has
held that, in the Indian setting, refusal to act on the testimony of a victim
rsk 29-APL-566-2025.doc
of sexual assault in the absence of corroboration as a rule, is adding insult
to injury. Viewing the evidence of the girl or the women who complains of
rape or sexual molestation, with the aid of spectacles fitted with lenses
tinged with doubt, disbelief or suspicion, is to justify the charge of male
chauvinism in a male dominated society. It is further held that, a girl or a
woman in the tradition bound non-permissive society of India would be
extremely reluctant even to admit that any incident which is likely to reflect
on her chastity had ever occurred. Over much importance cannot be given to
minor discrepancies.
6.2) In the case of State of Himachal Pradesh vs Shree Kant Shekari
reported in AIR 2004 SC 4404 : 2004 (8) SCC 153, the Supreme Court has
held that, mere delay in lodging FIR does not render prosecution version
redundant.
6.3) In the case of State of Punjab vs Ramdev Singh reported in 2004
(1) SCC 421, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that, the Courts have to
display a greater sense of responsibility and to be more sensitive while
dealing with charges of sexual assault on women, particularly of tender age
and children. It is further held that the said crime is violative of victim's basic
human right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and therefore
Court should deal with cases of sexual assault sternly.
7) After applying the aforestated ratios enunciated by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, to the present case, we are of the considered view that a
rsk 29-APL-566-2025.doc
strong prima facie case against the Applicant is made out and therefore it is
not a fit case for quashing of the crime in question.
7.1) Application is accordingly dismissed.
( RAJESH S. PATIL, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )
