Allowed

Shahabuddin I. Rogangar v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC19 Sept 2014WP/2469/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal writ petition sought quashing of an FIR registered for offences under sections 376(2)(n) and 420 IPC. Given that the parties are now married and the complainant, along with her mother, has no objection to quashing the complaint, the court allowed the petition applying the ratio of Narinder Singh. The petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

The criminal writ petition was allowed and the FIR was quashed.

Shahabuddin I. Rogangar Vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2014)

(Wp 2469 of 2014 )

VatZ

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No. 2469 OF 2014

¶6

Shahabuddin I. Rogangar ...Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents **********

¶7

Mr.H.S. Ansari for Petitioner Mrs. M.H. Mhatre-APP for the State Mr.Dilip Shukla for Respondent No.2 Respondent No.2 and her mother present in person ***********

¶8

CORAM : V. M. KANADE , & P.D. KODE, JJ.

¶9

DATE : SEPTEMBER 19, 2014

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the learned counsel for the State and Respondent No.2.

¶12

The Petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing the FIR No. 229 of 2014 which is registered at Dindoshi Police Station for the offence punishable under section 376 (2) n & 420 of the Indian Penal Code. A criminal complaint was filed by Respondent No.2 on 1.6.2014, on which date she shown to be 18 years of age. In the complaint, she has stated that the Petitioner used to have physical relations with her after he had promised her that he will get marry with her. However, thereafter, he refused to marry with her and, therefore,

1/2

(Wp 2469 of 2014 )

the complaint under section 376 (2) n & 420 of IPC was filed.

¶17

Perusal of the complaint indicates that Respondent No.2 has consensual sex relations and Respondent No.2 was adult at that time. It appears that the Petitioner, thereafter, agreed to get marry with Respondent No.2 and now they are staying together as husband and wife. The Petitioner has produced the Nikah Nama and relevant documents including the affidavit of Respondent No.2, wherein she has stated that she has filed the present complaint on account of her misunderstanding that the Petitioner did not intend to get marry with her. She has now stated that she has no objection if the complaint is quashed. We have interviewed her as well as her mother. Her mother has stated that she has no objection if the complaint is quashed. She has also stated that her daughter is happy and is staying with the Petitioner as his wife.

¶18

We have perused the Nikahnama and other documents. We are of the view that the ratio of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab and another [2014 AIR SCW 2065] would squarely apply to the facts of the present case. An additional affidavit of Respondent No.2 is also taken on record. Writ petition, therefore, is allowed in terms of (a) and is disposed of.

¶19

[P.D. KODE,J.] [ V. M. KANADE, J.]

¶20

Vaishali Tikam

¶21

2/2

Shahabuddin I. Rogangar v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahabuddin I. Rogangar v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prasad Raghunath Sutar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Baburao Sopan Nikam Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Yusuf Izaz Sayyed and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Pravinkumar Dilip Bhosale Anr. Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ravi Kiran Ganesh Katukam and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Vilas Hari Borle Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.