Bhavesh Keshav Mhatre and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

crwp3534

1

ssp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3534 OF 2016

¶5

1 Bhavesh Keshav Mhatre
2 Deepak Parshuram Kadam
3 Vrushabh Maruti Londhe @ Bhayya
4 Sairaj Nagesh Gore
5 Atish Ashok Bhanusaghare...Petitioners
vs.
1 State of Maharashtra
(at the instance of Badlapur
East Police Station,Dist.Thane)
2 Shatatarka Dattatray Bhadakwad
3 Smt.Kalpana Dattatraya Bhadakwad
4 Manish Pramod Wani ...Respondents

¶6

Mr.Viresh Purwant for the Petitioners
Ms S.V.Sonawane, APP for the respondent No.1
Mr.Sachin Deokar for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶7

CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
 A.A.SAYED, JJ.

¶8

 DATE : OCTOBER 25, 2016

¶9

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER A.S.OKA,J.)

¶10

1Rule. The learned APP waives service for the
first respondent. The learned counsel for the
second and third respondents waives service.
Forthwith taken up for final disposal.

¶11

2The prayer in this petition under Article 226
of the Constitution of India read with section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (for short
Cr.P.C.) is for quashing the FIR registered for the
offences under sections 354, 323, 507, 143, 147, 149
of the Indian Penal Code and section 8 of the

¶12

2 crwp3534

¶13

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,2012
(for short `the said Act of 2012'). The second
respondent is the first informant whose age on the
date of lodging of the FIR was 17 years. In the
FIR she has stated that the third respondent was her
friend. She has stated that she is taking education
in a College at Thane in XII Standard in Science
stream. She stated that one Yash Sontakke is also
her friend. She has stated that through her friend
Pranali, she was introduced to the first petitioner.
According to her case, the first petitioner had an
objection to the friendship of the second respondent
with the said Yash.

¶14

3The main incident is of 25th September 2016
which took place at about 12.15 p.m. On 24th
September 2016 the said Yash had suffered a minor
injury. At 12.15 p.m on 25th September 2016, the
second respondent and the third respondent came to a
medical shop for buying medicines and were
proceeding towards the residence of the said Yash
for giving him the medicines. She stated that after
coming back from the residence of the said Yash, she
received a phone call from the first petitioner.
The allegation is that the first petitioner abused
her. As desired by the first petitioner, the second
and third respondents came near the building where
the said Yash was residing. At that time, the first
petitioner along with other petitioners were present
there. At that time the first petitioner and other
petitioners committed objectionable act of outraging
the modesty of the second respondent. They

¶15

3

¶16

crwp3534

¶17

assaulted the third respondent.

¶18

4The third respondent has filed an affidavit
stating that after lodging of the FIR, his parents
and elderly persons felt that considering the young
age of the petitioners they should not be dragged to
the criminal Court. He has stated that there is a
settlement between him and the second respondent.
The mother of the second respondent Mrs.Kalpana
Dattatray Bhadakwad has also filed an affidavit.
She has stated that after lodging of the FIR, she
realised that as a result of the registration of the
FIR her daughter and the petitioners who are her
friends will be dragged to the criminal Court. She
has stated that she does not desire that her
daughter and her friends visit the police station or
the criminal Court any longer. She has further
stated that the respectable persons from the
locality have met the family members of the
petitioners as well as her family members and
thereafter, they have decided to put an end of the
controversy.

¶19

5The petitioners have deposited a sum of
Rs.50,000/- each by separate demand drafts drawn in
the name of the Registrar of this Court on 20th
October 2016. The petitioners have filed separate
affidavits dated 10th October 2016. They have given
undertakings to do the cleaning work in the Ward
No.1, Kulgaon, within the limit of Badlapur
Municipal Council for two hours on every Sunday in
the month of November 2016 as may be directed by the

¶20

crwp3534

¶21

4

¶22

Ward Officer of the said Ward.

¶23

6It appears from the statement of the second
respondent recorded by the police on the basis of
which the FIR was registered that the first
petitioner was very wellknown to her as they had
joined same coaching class when they were in VII
Standard. As disclosed in the cause title, the
petitioners are in the age group of 19 to 22 years.
It is pertinent to note that neither the third
respondent nor the mother of the second respondent
had came out with a case that no such incident had
taken place. They have stated that considering the
young ages of the petitioners, they should not be
dragged to the criminal Court. The mother of the
second respondent has stated that she does not
desire to force her daughter to visit the police
station or the criminal Court.

¶24

7The petitioners have shown remorse by
depositing a sum of Rs.50,000/- each. The
petitioners have offered to do social service by
undertaking to do the cleaning work in Ward No.1,
Kulgaon, Badlapur on every Sunday in the month of
November 2016. In fact, undertakings to that effect
have been separately filed by the petitioners.

¶25

8Considering the peculiar facts of the case as
narrated above, it cannot be said the offence
alleged is against the society at large.
Considering the respective ages of the petitioners
and the remorse shown by them, we are inclined to

¶26

crwp3534

¶27

5

¶28

exercise power under section 482 of the Cr.P.C for
quashing the offences.

¶29

9 Accordingly, we pass the following order:

¶30

(I)We accept the undertakings of the
petitioners dated 10th October 2016 in which
they have undertaken that they will do the work
of cleaning in Ward No.1, Kulgaon, Badlapur on
every Sunday in the month of November 2016
under the directions of the Ward Officer of the
said Ward;

¶31

(II)We direct the Officer in charge of the
Badlapur Police Station to communicate this
order to the Ward Officer of Ward No.1 by
submitting a copy of this Judgment and order.
On receipt of a copy of the the Judgment and
Order, the Ward Officer of Ward No.1, Badlapur
Municipal Council shall assign appropriate work
of cleaning to the petitioners for a period of
two hours on every Sunday in the month of
November 2016;

¶32

(III)The Ward Officer of Ward No.1 shall issue a
certificate of compliance of these directions
by the petitioners which shall be handed over
to the Officer In-charge of the Badlapur (East)
Police Station on or before 3rd December 2016;

¶33

(IV)Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer
clause (a) which reads thus:
“(a)this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash
the F.I.R dated 26.9.2016 filed by the
Respondent No.2 herein which is registered

¶34

6 crwp3534

¶35

as C.R.No.I-128 of 2016, with Badlapur East
Police Station, District Thane, on such
terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court
deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.”

¶36

(V)We direct the Registrar (Judicial-I) to
transfer the amounts deposited by the
petitioners together with interest accrued
thereon, if any, to the Maharashtra State
Legal Services Authority for the use of the
said amount for the work relating to
mediation;

¶37

(VI)The petition shall be listed on 7th
December 2016 under the caption of
`directions'. Compliance report shall be
filed by the Officer In charge of Badlapur
(East) Police Station;

¶38

(VII)At the time of consideration of the
compliance report, we direct the petitioners
to personally remain present in the Court;

¶39

(VIII)We direct the petitioners to report to
the Ward Officer of Ward No.1, Badlapur
Municipal Council, District Thane on 3rd
November 2016 at 11.00 a.m.

¶40

(A.A.SAYED,J.)

Bhavesh Keshav Mhatre and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhavesh Keshav Mhatre and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asma Begum Mohammed Siddiq Shaikh and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bhaveshkumar Jagannath Thakur and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Vijaypratap Talukdar Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.