Quashed

Anupam S/O Nandavanam Padmanabhan v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Sitaburdi Nagpur and Another

Bombay HC1 Mar 2024APL/345/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the criminal application to quash the FIR and proceedings for offences under Sections 376(2)(n), 417, 506(2) IPC and Section 66(E) IT Act. The Court held the relationship was consensual between adults who had decided to marry, and the victim’s no-objection statement confirmed quashing was appropriate to prevent abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 634 of 2023 at Police Station Sitaburdi, Nagpur, and proceedings quashed.

Anupam S/O Nandavanam Padmanabhan vs the State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:2806-DB

¶2

38 cri.apl 345-24.odt

¶3

1/4

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 345 OF 2024

¶5

Anupam Nandavanam Padmanabhan, aged Applicant. about 48 years, Occup. Business R/o 9, Raviraj Apartments, Ramdaspeth, Shankar Nagar, Nagpur.

¶6

- Versus -

¶7

State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Sitaburdi, Nagpur.

¶8

XYZ in Crime No.634 of 2024, dated Non05/10/2023, Registered in Sitaburdi Police applicants Station, Nagpur.

¶9

Mr.Zeeshan Haq, counsel for the applicant. Mr.S.A.Ashirgade, APP for the non-applicant No.1. Mr.V.M.Vishwarupe, counsel for non-applicant No.2.

¶10

CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.

¶11

DATE :6^th MARCH, 2024

¶12

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : Vinay Joshi J.)

¶13

Heard.

¶14

Admit . The application is heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

This is an application seeking to quash First Information

¶16

Report in Crime No.634 of 2023 registered at Police Station Sitaburdi, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections

¶17

Kavita .

¶18

38 cri.apl 345-24.odt

¶19

2/4

¶20

376(2)(n), 417 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66 (E) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶21

The applicant’s learned counsel would submit that the contents of the First Information Report does not discloses the offence of rape. It is submitted that both were quite matured having relationship, but out of minor bickering report has been lodged. It is submitted that, by the time, both of them have decided to marry for which they made registration with the office of SDM, Delhi of which receipt is produced.

¶22

At the instance of report, lodged by informant lady aged 32 years crime has been registered. It is her case that in the month of August-2020 through face book she got acquainted with the applicant. Their casual acquaintance turned into love relationship. They were frequently meeting with each other. Informant stated that both of them decided to marry and it was informed to their family members. The report indicates that at different places they travelled, lived on various occasions. However, the informant stated that while they were at Tirupati in the month of December 2022 while living in a lodging house they had sexual relations. The informant further stated that there were talks of marriage but it was

¶23

Kavita .

¶24

38 cri.apl 345-24.odt

¶25

3/4

¶26

not materialised. The applicant refused for marriage and had again sexual relations in the month of September 2023 and therefore the report.

¶27

Reading of entire police report discloses that there was love affair between grownup couple. Rather, the contents of First Information Report indicates that both were educated and had travelled at various places, lived at different lodging house. Pertaining to note that the informant never stated that on first occasion the applicant sexually exploited her under any promise or threat, rather it conveys that while both of them were living in lodging house at Tirupati they had sexual relations. We are unable to pursue any element of obtaining consent by deceitful means. Though informant stated that in the month of September 2023, they had sexual relations by force, however, there was no report till next one month. Informant lady has filed an affidavit stating that their difference have been solved and now both of them decided to marry. She has also gave her no objection to quash the proceedings. The informant lady has appeared before this Court and given her consent for quashing of First Information Report and her willingness has been verified by the Registrar of this Court.

¶28

Kavita .

¶29

38 cri.apl 345-24.odt

¶30

4/4

¶31

Considering the allegations made in the First Information Report, it is evident that out of minor bickering between two adults, report has been lodged. The contents of the First Information Report that both were living at different places conveys loudly that it is a case of consensual relationship. Moreover, both of them have decided to marry and thus, the continuation of prosecution amounts to abuse of the process of Court.

¶32

In view of above, the application is allowed and disposed of. We, hereby quash and set aside the First Information Report No.634 of 2023 registered at Police Station Sitaburdi, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n),417 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66 (E) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶33

(VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J) (VINAY JOSHI, J)

¶34

Signed by: Kavita P Tayade Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 07/03/2024 17:21:03 Kavita .

Anupam S/O Nandavanam Padmanabhan v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Sitaburdi Nagpur and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anupam S/O Nandavanam Padmanabhan v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Sitaburdi Nagpur and Another

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Hemant S/O. Harseeet Bain Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso Gadchiroli, Dist. Gadchiroli and Another.

Sonu @ Subodh S/O. Babaraoji Lanjewar Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Home Dept. (Spl.) Thr. Its Section Officer, Mantralaya Mumbai and Another.

Kamla W/O. Balkrushna Chandan and 12 Others Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps Khadan, Akola, Tah. and Dist. Akola and Another.

Sonali W/O Pradeep Thombre and Another vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Chikhali Tah.Chikhali Dist.Buldhana and Another

Swati W/O. Pravin Dahalke and Others Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps, Buldana, Dist. Buldana and Another

Ashwini D/O Ramdas Gaikwad Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Murtizapur Tq.Murtizapur Dist.Akola and Another