CrApp allowed quashing of Sessions proceedings in an alleged Section 376 case. The High Court noted an affidavit showing mutual resolution and consent by the victim, who confirmed no coercion was involved.
Criminal Application No.250 of 2018 allowed; proceedings in Sessions Case No.160 of 2014 quashed and set aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
21-APL-250-2018.doc
SAT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 250 OF 2018
Shoeb Aslam Khan ...Applicant Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Ninad Muzumdar, Advocate for Applicant.
Dr. Shreya Shrivastava a/w Bhairavi a/w Varsha Manoharan, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
Shweta S. Padwal, Respondent No.2 Present in Person. Mr. Ajay Patil, APP for the Respondent–State.
P.C. :-
Sessions Case No.160 of 2014 pending in the Court of Sessions for Greater Bombay with consent of Respondent No.2.
Digitally signed SUNNY by SUNNY ANKUSHRAO ANKUSHRAO THOTE THOTE Date: 2023.04.20 15:05:26 +0530
1/3
21-APL-250-2018.doc
SAT
application stating that, the Respondent No.2 has mutually resolved her dispute with the Applicant. She was in love with the Applicant. The relationship between them was consensual. This application is pending in this Court since 2018. The Respondent No.2 has filed a fresh affidavit dated 6th April, 2023 stating that, she had love affair with Applicant and the relationship was consensual. She has consented for quashing the proceedings out of her own free will and without any coercion from any person. She has no objection for quashing C.R. No.388 of 2014 and consequent charge-sheet in Sessions Case No.160 of 2014 pending before the Court of Sessions Dindoshi, Mumbai.
2/3
21-APL-250-2018.doc
SAT
was physical relationship between them. Since, the parties have resolved the dispute and Respondent No.2 has consented for quashing the proceedings, the relief sought in this application can be granted.
ORDER
[PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.] [A.S. GADKARI, J.]
3/3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings may be quashed under Section 482 CrPC upon settlement and consent of parties in a consensual relationship dispute.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shoeb Aslam Khan
The State of Maharashtra
Shweta S. Padwal
PRAKASH D. NAIK
A.S. GADKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
