Bombay High Court
Faizan S/O Iqbal Sheikh And Others vs State Of Maharashtra Through Police ... on 8 October, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:10411-DB
J-APL 1294-2025.odt 1/7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL)NO.1294/2025
1. FAIZAN S/O. IQBAL SHEIKH, Age: 25
years, Occupation: Student, R/O. Plot No.
18, Subhan Nagar, H.B. Town Chowk, Pol.
St. Kalamna, Nagpur
2. IQBAL S/O. ABDUL RAFIK SHIEKΗ,
Age: 52 years, Occupation: Auto Driver,
R/O. Plot No. 18, Subhan Nagar, H.B.
Town Chowk, Pol. St. Kalamna, Nagpur
3. BADRUN NISA W/O. IQBAL SHEIΚΗ,
Age: 48 years, Occupation Housewife,
R/O. Plot No. 18, Subhan Nagar, H.B.
Town Chowk, Pol. St. Kalamna,
... APPLICANTS
...VERSUS...
1. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA,
Through P.S.Officer Kalamna Police Station,
Dist.Nagpur.
2. NANDINI RAHUL GANVIR,
Age: 24 Years, R/o. Nagsena Nagar, Near
Buddha Vihar, Modipadav, Kamptee,
Nagpur. 441001
...NON-APPLICANTS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri. Nazim Qureshi, Advocate for applicants
Shri N.B. Jawade, APP for non-applicant No.1/State
Shri Z.Z. Haq, Advocate for non-applicant No.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J-APL 1294-2025.odt 2/7
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 23.09.2025
PRONOUNCED ON : 08.10.2025
JUDGMENT (PER : NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.)
Heard. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned
Counsel for both the parties.
2. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal
Procedure Code (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), for quashing and setting aside
First Information Report (for short 'FIR') bearing Crime No.
0297/2025, registered with the Non-Applicant No.1-Kalamna Police
Station, Nagpur on 13/04/2025 for offences punishable under
Sections 69, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
r/w Section 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r)(s)
of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act (for short 'SCST Act'). The applicant further prays for
quashing and setting aside charge-sheet No. 146/2025, filed in
Special Case No. 408/2025, pending before the learned Additional
Session Judge - 11 and Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. The non-applicant No.2 lodged FIR with the applicant No.1
for the offences mentioned above. As per the said FIR, the
complainant and the present applicant No.1 were studying together
in J.D. Engineering College and were classmates. It is further
alleged that since 2021, they were acquainted with each other and
during the said acquaintance, the applicant No.1 forced himself on
the non-applicant No.2 and had established physical relationships
with her on the pretext of getting married. It is further stated in the
FIR that the complainant met the family of the applicant No.1 and
the family members told that in order to marry the applicant No.1
she will have to embrace Islam. It is further stated that the
applicant No.1 blackmailed the complainant with a video and the
mother of the applicant No.1, i.e. the applicant No.3 abused her. On
the basis of these allegations, an offence was registered against the
applicants and the said FIR was challenged in the present
application.
4. We have heard Shri Nazim Qureshi, learned Counsel for the
applicants, Shri N.B. Jawade, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
for the non-applicant No.1/State and Shri Z.Z. Haq, learned
Counsel for the non-applicant No.2.
5. Learned Counsel for the applicants states that a meaningful
reading of the FIR in question would reveal that the applicant No.1
as also non-applicant No.2, were in a consensual relationship and
both being adult and major they are very well aware of the
consequences of entering into such relationship before marriage. It
is his submission that there was no promise to marry much less at
the inception of the relationship and, therefore, no offence is made
out.
6. On the other hand, Shri N.B. Jawade, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for non-applicant No.1/State submits that the
averments in the FIR are sufficient enough to make out an offence
mentioned in the same.
7. Shri Z.Z. Haq, learned Counsel for non-applicant No.2 also
supports the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and states that
the matter has been amicably settled and, therefore, there is no
objection for quashing.
8. In the backdrop, of these facts we have perused the
averments made in the FIR, as also the charge-sheet filed by the
prosecution after investigating the offence. As can be seen from the
FIR in question, the complainant i.e. the non-applicant No.2, is
aged 24 years and the applicant No.1 is aged 25 years. It is thus
clear that both of them are adult and major. The alleged incidents
are ranging from 2021 onward, while the FIR is lodged on
13.04.2025. From the meaningful reading of the FIR in question, it
can be seen that both of them out of their own volition and free will
entered into a relationship which continued for almost four years.
Now, in the present matter the non-applicant No.2 has by way of an
affidavit stated as under :
"It is pertinent to mention here that the applicants and
non applicant no. 2 have amicably settled the matter
and that the allegations charged upon the applicants
were because of the misunderstanding, and that the
non-applicant no. 2 wants to make amends and by the
present reply, stating that she does not wishes to
continue the prosecution against the applicants."
9. In view of these averments made in the affidavit, we have
verified the contents from the parties who were present before us
on 23.09.2025. The applicants as also the non-applicant No.2 have
admitted that they have amicably settled the matter without any
fear or favour from anybody.
10. True it is that offences complained are non-bailable in nature,
however, in the celebrated judgment in the case of Gian Singh Vs.
State of Punjab, 2012 (10) SCC 303, the Hon'ble Apex Court has
held that even non-compoundable offences can be quashed by this
Court, by resorting to its power under Section 482 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, if the contingency mentioned therein are present
in the matter. The continuation of criminal proceedings would be an
exercise in futility in view of the facts stated herein before. Further,
in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajanlal and others,
1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, and more particularly paragraph No.102
in parameter 7, the Hon'ble Apex Court has clearly held that the
continuance of further criminal trial would amount to an abuse of
process of the Court and there are no chances of conviction.
11. In view of that, we are of the opinion that continuing the
proceedings further against the applicants would be an exercise of
futility and, therefore, we quash and set aside the FIR and charge-
sheet. Accordingly, we proceed to pass following order :
ORDER
i) The application is allowed.
ii) The First Information Report bearing Crime No. 0297/2025,
registered with the non-applicant No.1-Kalamna Police Station,
Nagpur dated 13.04.2025, as also, consequent charge-sheet
No.146/2025, filed in Special Case No. 408/2025, pending before
the learned Additional Session Judge- 11 and Special Judge,
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities),
for offences punishable under Sections 69, 352, 351(2), 351(3),
3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita r/w Section 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)
(ii), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(v), 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, are hereby quashed
and set aside.
12. The application is disposed of.
(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)
Jayashree..
