Applicants sought quashing of FIR for outraging modesty and voluntarily causing hurt after amicable settlement; informant gave no objection before Court. Holding offence not heinous and continuation of prosecution an abuse of process, High Court quashed FIR.
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.
1 34.34A.apl.199.2022.200.2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.199 OF 2022
Narayan Ramao Ingle ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and anr.
AND
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.200 OF 2022
Prashant Gulabrao Jadhav
..vs.. State of Maharashtra and anr.
CORAM: VINAY JOSHI AND MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 10/10/2024.
Heard.
2 34.34A.apl.199.2022.200.2022
relevant time, applicant Prashant Jadhave (in Criminal Application No.200/2022) was present, who has also pulled her saree, and therefore, the offence.
(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)
Trupti
1 issue framed by the court
Whether FIR No.784/2021 under Sections 354, 323 r/w 34 IPC should be quashed following amicable settlement between parties.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Narayan Ramao Ingle
Prashant Gulabrao Jadhav
State of Maharashtra
Vinay Joshi
Vrushali V. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
