Bombay High Court
Manohar S/O Harishchandra Mankar vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Paratwada ... on 7 November, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:11601-DB
1 J APL-737-2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.737 OF 2021
APPLICANT : Manohar s/o Harishchandra Mankar,
Age: 56 Years, Occu: Service
Residence of Vyankatesh Nagar,
Vidharbh Mills, Paratwada, Tq.
Achalpur, Dist: Amravati.
..VERSUS..
NON-APPLICANTS : 1. State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Paratwada Police Station, Paratwada,
Tq. Achalpur, Dist : Amravati.
2. Sub-Divisional Police Officer,
Achalpur, Tq. Achalpur, Dist :
Amravati.
3. XYZ in Crime No.390/21,
Police Station Paratwada, Tq. Achalpur,
Dist : Amravati.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr D. S. Khushalani, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr N. Joshi, Addl. P. P. for Non-Applicant/State.
Mr B. B. Pantawane, Advocate for Non-Applicant No.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 13th OCTOBER, 2025.
PRONOUNCED ON : 7th NOVEMBER, 2025.
JUDGMENT (PER : NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.)
. Heard.
2 J APL-737-2021.odt
2. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned
Counsels for the parties.
3. The applicant has approached this Court by filing the
present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 seeking to quash and set aside the First
Information Report No.390 of 2021 dated 14.06.2021 registered
with Police Station Paratwada, District Amravati (Rural), for the
offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 452, 323, 504 and
506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also offense punishable
under Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled
Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The applicant has
further prayed to stay the proceedings of the offences mentioned
supra against which a charge-sheet bearing No.82 of 2024 dated
28.06.2024 came to be filed and to further stay the proceedings
pending before the learned Judge, Additional Sessions Court,
Achalpur.
4. It is the case of the non-applicant No.3 and as per the
contents of the First Information Report, that about five years
prior to lodging of the report, she came into acquaintance with the
3 J APL-737-2021.odt
Applicant namely Manohar Harishchandra Mankar, as she used to
pass by his house while going to work. The acquaintance gradually
developed into a love affair. Thereafter, the applicant began
visiting the house of non-applicant No.3 even in the presence of
her husband and children. It is further alleged in the report that on
several occasions, the applicant has visited the house of the non-
applicant No.3 even during the absence of her husband and
children. Initially, the applicant behaved well with her; however,
with the lapse of time, he started forcing himself upon the non-
applicant No.3 and established physical relations with her against
her will. This conduct of the applicant allegedly continued for
about four years. Out of fear and to protect her own dignity, non-
applicant No.3 did not disclose this to anyone.
5. It is further alleged that about a year prior to lodging
of the First Information Report, the applicant started taking
money from non-applicant No.3 on the pretext of depositing the
same in a women's self-help (saving) group (Mahila Bachat Gut).
However, the said amount was never returned by the applicant.
When, the non-applicant No.3 demanded repayment of the said
4 J APL-737-2021.odt
amount, the applicant abused her in filthy language and even
assaulted her on several occasions.
6. It is further alleged that about two months prior to
lodging of the First Information Report, at around 11:00 a.m.,
when the husband of the non-applicant No.3 had gone to work
and her children were at school, the said applicant trespassed into
the non-applicant No.3's house and caught hold of her. At that
moment, the husband of non-applicant No.3 returned home and
witnessed the incident. At the same time, the non-applicant No.3
pacified her husband and drove the applicant out of the house.
Despite this, the applicant continued his visits to the house of the
non-applicant No.3 during the absence of her husband and
children and repeatedly threatened to kill her.
7. It is further alleged that the applicant threatened non-
applicant No.3 that unless she maintained physical relations with
him, he would kill her. Out of fear for her life, the non-applicant
No.3 continued to maintain physical relations with him. Even
when she resisted, the applicant allegedly forced himself upon her.
5 J APL-737-2021.odt
It is also alleged that the applicant also threatened her with
defamation if she disclosed the facts of the incident to anyone.
8. It is also the case of the non-applicant No.3 that she
belonged to the Gond (Scheduled Tribe) community and that the
applicant took undue advantage of the non-applicant No. 3's social
position, abused her with caste-related slurs, assaulted her several
times and sexually exploited her by force.
9. We have heard Mr. Deepak S. Khushalani, learned
counsel for the applicant, Mr. Nikhil Joshi, Additional Public
Prosecutor for the non-applicant/State and Mr. B. B. Pantawane,
learned counsel for the non-applicant No.3.
10. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
applicant has no nexus whatsoever with the alleged offences and
that the entire First Information Report is based on false and
fabricated allegations. It is submitted that the non-applicant No.3
is one of the beneficiaries and a member of the Women's Self-Help
(Savings) Group (Mahila Bachat Gut), which is being run by the
applicant and for the said purpose, the applicant and the non-
6 J APL-737-2021.odt
applicant No.3 have been acquainted with each other for the past
one year.
11. The learned counsel further submits that the Non-
applicant No.3 repeatedly and unlawfully demanded money from
the Applicant, despite having already borrowed funds from the
said Mahila Bachat Gut. The Applicant, on several occasions,
explained to the non-applicant No.3 that due to the pandemic,
Annual General Meeting (A.G.M.) could not be convened and
assured her that any outstanding amount due and payable to her
would be repaid as soon as such a meeting is held. However, the
non-applicant No.3 paid no heed to the issue explained to her by
the applicant which subsequently led to a dispute between the
applicant and the non-applicant No.3.
12. The learned counsel further submits that due to the
said dispute, the husband of the non-applicant No.3, namely
Bhimrao Bhaurao Meshram assaulted the applicant resulting in the
dislocation of the applicant's bone. Consequently, the applicant
lodged a First Information Report with the non-applicant No.1
under the relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
7 J APL-737-2021.odt
13. The learned counsel submits that the non-applicant
No.3 and her husband further continued their mischievous
activities and on 09.06.2021, threatened the Applicant that they
would falsely implicate him in a case of atrocity and rape. Owing
to such threats, on 09.06.2021, the applicant lodged a written
complaint before the non-applicant No.1/Police Station. However,
no stringent action was taken by the non-applicant No.1 upon
such complaint and only a non-cognizable report was registered
against the non-applicant No.3 and her husband. On the same
date, the non-applicant No.3 also lodged a complaint against the
applicant, which too came to be registered as a non-cognizable
report. The learned counsel contends that no incident as alleged in
the present First Information Report was reported by the Non-
applicant No.3 in her complaint lodged on 09.06.2021, which
thereby demonstrates that the present First Information Report is
false, vexatious and an afterthought.
14. The learned counsel further submits that on
14.06.2021, the non-applicant No.3 and her husband through one
organization named Birsa Munda Adivasi Sanghatna exerted
8 J APL-737-2021.odt
pressure upon the Applicant. Representatives of the said
organization namely Arvind Yewnate and three others called the
applicant to a hotel owned by one Anil Pimpale. Upon reaching
there, the applicant found the non-applicant No.3, her son
Akhilesh and two others namely Dilip Uttamrao Wankhade and
Ravindra Marotirao Gorle were present. One representative
namely Arvind Yewnate threatened the applicant that unless the
applicant paid either the demanded money by the non-applicant
No.3 or an amount of ₹25,000/-, he would be falsely implicated in
a case of atrocity or rape and thus tried to extort money from the
applicant. As a consequence of such an event, the applicant lodged
a report dated 14.06.2021 against one Arvind Yewnate.
15. The learned counsel further submits that the non-
applicant No.3 reached the Paratwada Police Station to lodge false
complaint against the applicant along with the representative of
the said Birsa Munda Sanghatna. The applicant who was already
present there to register a complaint against the non-applicant
No.3 came to be arrested by the Police Officials.
9 J APL-737-2021.odt
16. The learned counsel for the applicant further submits
that the present First Information Report has been lodged to
falsely implicate the applicant. The present First Information
Report was lodged by the non-applicant No.3 only to take
vengeance and is a reaction to the timely actions taken by the
applicant.
17. On the contrary, the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the applicant. It is submitted that upon
registration of the First Information Report, the investigating
agency commenced investigation and for the said matter, the non-
applicant No.2/State of Maharashtra collected evidence, examined
witnesses and obtained medical reports. The applicant came to be
arrested on 14.06.2021 and also referred to the medical
examination. The Schedules Tribe certificate of the non-applicant
No.3 and caste certificate were also obtained.
18. It is further submitted by the learned Additional
Public Prosecutor that the allegations levelled against the applicant
10 J APL-737-2021.odt
are of a serious nature and there exists a prima facie case to reject
the said application.
19. In the backdrop of these submissions, we have perused
the First Information Report alleging commission of offences
punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 452, 323, 504 and 506 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and also offense punishable under
Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
20. As can be seen from the said First Information Report,
the victim is aged about 30 years while the accused is aged about
50 years. Thus, both the persons are major, adult and are able to
understand the replication of the actions taken by them. The
controversy in the present matter has to be adjudicated in the light
of these facts. As can be seen from bare perusal of the First
Information Report in question, the relationship between the
parties ensued on 09.07.2018 and continued till 10.04.2021 i.e.
about three years. No complaint has been made till the said period
of three years. Furthermore, it is noteworthy to mention that the
complainant/non-applicant No.3 is a married women having two
11 J APL-737-2021.odt
sons and living with her family. Therefore, there was no question
of the applicant promising the non-applicant No.3 of marriage. It
therefore leads to the inevitable conclusion that the relationship
between the parties was consensual and voluntary in nature. This
admitted fact speaks more than the words and leave us to the
conclusion that the relationship was consensual.
21. As far as the offence under Section 3(2)(va) of the
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989 is concerned, nothing has been stated in the First
Information Report, as also the consequent charge-sheet filed on
record, that the victim was harassed due to the fact that she was
belonging to a particular caste. Thus, the offence under the said
Act is also not made out.
22. In light of these facts, we are of the view that no
offence much less the one complained of in the First Information
Report is made out and the relationship between the two persons
being adults and majors was purely consensual in nature. The
continuance of the proceedings would therefore be of no avail and
12 J APL-737-2021.odt
would cause unnecessary harassment to the applicant. We
therefore pass the following order :
ORDER
i) The criminal application is allowed.
ii) First Information Report No.390 of 2021 dated 14.06.2021
registered with Paratwada Police Station, District Amravati (Rural)
for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 452, 323,
504 and 506 of the IPC and under Section 3(2)(va) of the
Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
as also the charge-sheet filed in the said matter bearing No.82 of
2024 are hereby quashed and set aside.
23. Parties to bear their own costs.
24. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)
TAMBE.
Signed by: Mr. Ashish Tambe
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 07/11/2025 18:37:40
