Allowed

Masab Rafik Valiyani v. through Senior Police Inspector Sahar Police Station

Bombay HC5 Jul 2024WP/2720/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition to quash an FIR for rape registered after a consensual relationship soured. The prosecutrix filed a consent affidavit and the parties married; with her no objection, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 355 of 2023 (C.R. No. 276 of 2023) dated 15 July 2023 quashed in terms of prayer clause (b).

Masab Rafik Valiyani vs through Senior Police Inspector… — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Gitalaxmi 24-wp-2720-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2720 OF 2024

¶5

Masab Rafik Valiyani, Age 28 years, Residing at B 602, Sagufa Apartment, Sahakar Road, Jogeshwari (West), Mumbai – 400 102. …..Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra Through The Senior Police Inspector, Sahar Police Station.

¶8

X.Y.Z., Age 25 years, Residing at A-701, Shreeram Tower CHSL, Off. MTNL Road, Shanti Park, Behind DCB, Mira Road (East), Mira-Bhyander, Thane, Maharashtra – 401 107. …..Respondents

¶9

Mr. H. I. Sirguroh a/w Mr. Parth S. Vadhan for the Petitioner. Smt. Madhavi H. Mhatre, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State. Mr. Smit Shah for Respondent No. 2. P.I. Mr. Mangesh Borse, Sahar Police Station, Mumbai present.

¶10

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : 19^th SEPTEMBER 2024.

¶11

ORDER (Per Dr. Neela Gokhale, J.) :-

¶12

Petitioner seeks to quash F.I.R. No. 355 of 2023 (C.R. No. 276

¶13

of 2023) dated 15^th July 2023 registered with the Sahar Police Station,

¶14

Mumbai for the offense punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (I.P.C.).

¶15

1/3

¶16

Gitalaxmi 24-wp-2720-2024.doc

¶17

The parties were in a consensual relationship. Certain misunderstandings arose between the parties leading to registration of the F.I.R. impugned herein.

¶18

The Investigating Officer has not filed the Final Report till date.

¶19

Mr. H. I. Sirguroh, learned counsel appears for the Petitioner and Mr. Smit Shah, learned counsel appears for the Respondent No. 2. Smt. Madhavi H. Mhatre, learned A.P.P. represents the State.

¶20

Learned counsels of both the Petitioner as well as the Respondent No. 2 state that, considering the decision of the parties to resolve their dispute by amicable settlement, Respondent No. 2 has filed her consent Affidavit dated 10^th September 2024 duly affirmed before a Notary Public. In paragraph No. 12 thereof, she has given her no objection to quash and set aside the present F.I.R. The Respondent No. 2 in her Affidavit states that, the parties have settled their differences and misunderstandings and infact they have solemnized their marriage on 15^th July 2024 at Abu Dhabi as per Islamic Rites and Law. The Judicial Department of U.A.E. has issued the certificate of marriage bearing Regd. No. 8142-2024.

¶21

Respondent No. 2 is present in the Court and on instructions her counsel reiterates the statements made by her in the Affidavit. We accept the statements.

¶22

Considering the facts in the present case and the consent Affidavit of Respondent No. 2, we are inclined to quash F.I.R. No. 355 of

¶23

2/3

¶24

Gitalaxmi 24-wp-2720-2024.doc

¶25

2023 (C.R. No. 276 of 2023) dated 15^th July 2023 registered with the Sahar

¶26

Police Station, Mumbai.

¶27

In view of the above, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer

¶28

clause (b).

¶29

(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (A. S. GADKARI, J.)

¶30

Digitally signed by GITALAXMI GITALAXMI KRISHNA KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR KOTAWADEKAR Date: 2024.09.23 14:00:12 +0530

¶31

3/3

Masab Rafik Valiyani v. through Senior Police Inspector Sahar Police Station

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Masab Rafik Valiyani v. through Senior Police Inspector Sahar Police Station

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

Azhar Ali Shabbir Hussain vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Jyotirling Baburao Kolhapure vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bhushan Sadashiv Raut vs State of Maharashtra

Pankaj Deepak Chilap vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ankit S/O Surendra Kumar Vyas vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Praveen Thimappa Kotian and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.