Allowed

Vinayak Bhosale v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC3 Sept 2024WP/3180/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR under Section 354 IPC for allegedly outraging a woman's modesty. The parties settled their dispute, and the complainant filed a consent affidavit with no objection to quashing.

What did the court decide?

FIR C.R No. 775 of 2023 quashed subject to payment of Rs.50,000 cost to Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund; petitions revived automatically if costs unpaid.

Vinayak Bhosale vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AS:35306-DB

¶2

sns 3-wp-3633-2024.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3633 OF 2024 1. Kishor Vijay Aachrekar Age: 39, Residing at-Krishna Apartment, Room No.411, Rishikesh Apartment, Manval Pada Gaon, Shamshanbhumi, Virar (E), 401 305 …..Petitioner Vs. 1. The State Of Maharashtra, Through the Senior Police Inspector, Virar Police Station 2. XYZ ...Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.3180 OF 2024 Vinayak Bhosale Age: 40 Residing at- Manohar Bhosale, A/303, Trimurti Apartment, Type-A, Manvelpada Road, Near Manvepada Talav, Vasai, Thane 401 305 ….Petitioner Vs. 1. The State Of Maharashtra, Through the Senior Police Inspector, Virar Police Station 2. XYZ Age-42 Years …..Respondents Mr. Asif Latif Shaikh, for the Petitioners. Mr. Ashish I. Satpute, APP for the State.

¶6

1/5

¶7

sns 3-wp-3633-2024.doc

¶8

Mr. Sudeep Pasbola, Sr.Adv. with Adv. Ayush Pasbola, Mr. Ayaan Bhattacharya i/b Mr. Waqar Pathan, for Respondent No.2.

¶9

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND DR NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. RESERVED ON : 22nd AUGUST, 2024. PRONOUNCED ON : 3^rd SEPTEMBER, 2024.

¶10

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

¶11

The Petitioners seek quashing and setting aside F.I.R bearing C.R No. 775 of 2023 dated 9^th August 2022 registered with the Virar Police station, Mira-Bhayander for offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”).

¶12

1. The Brief facts of the case are;

¶13

2.1) The Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 3180 of 2024 is Vinayak Bhosale and the Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 3633 of 2024 is Kishor Aachrekar, the assistant of Mr. Bhosale.

¶14

2.2) It is alleged that on 8^th August 2023, at around 9:15 pm, the Respondent No. 2 was walking in the compound of her residence. After some time, she saw Mr. Kishor Aac hrekar and Mr. Vinayak Bhosale loitering near her house and looking into her house. When he was confronted by the Respondent No.2, Mr. Vinayak Bhosale in a fit of rage, punched the Respondent no. 2 on her chest and also hit her left arm. Furthermore, he also, on being provoked by the Kishore Aachrekar, outraged her modesty. Thus, the Respondent No. 2 filed the subject FIR against the Petitioners.

¶15

Mr. Asif Latif Shaikh, learned Counsel appeared for the

¶16

2/5

¶17

sns 3-wp-3633-2024.doc

¶18

Petitioners and Mr. Sudeep Pasbola learned Senior Counsel appeared for the Respondent No. 2. Mr. Ashish Satpute, learned APP represented the State.

¶19

Both the counsels contend that considering the decision of the parties to resolve their dispute by amicable settlement and the Consent Terms filed before this court, the subject FIR be quashed. The Respondent No.2 has filed her Consent Affidavit dated 9^th July 2024. The Respondent No.2 has given her no objection to quash the subject FIR and has said that she does not wish to proceed further with the same.

¶20

Although the Respondent No. 2 is not present in the Court today, Mr. Sudeep Pasbola, on instructions states that the Respondent No. 2 does not have any objection to quash the subject FIR filed against the Petitioners. It is also stated in the Affidavit that due to the intervention of friends and acquaintances, both the parties have resolved their dispute. Mr. Pasbola also reiterates the contents in the affidavit. We accept his statement.

¶21

In view thereof, we are inclined to quash F.I.R bearing C.R No. 775 of 2023 dated 9^th August 2022 registered with the Virar Police station, Mira-Bhayander for offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (“IPC”).

¶22

As we expressed our opinion for quashing of F.I.R bearing C.R No. 775 of 2023 dated 9^th August 2022 registered with the Virar Police station, Mira-Bhayander, learned Advocate for the Petitioners on

¶23

3/5

¶24

sns 3-wp-3633-2024.doc

¶25

instructions submitted that, the Petitioners will pay a cost of Rs.25,000/each totalling to Rs.50,000/- jointly or severally to the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund within a period of two weeks from the date of uploading of the present Order on the official website of High Court of Bombay. The said statement is accepted as an undertaking to the Court.

¶26

In view thereof, we direct Petitioners to pay the cost as noted herein above to the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund within a period of two weeks from the date of uploading of present Order on the official website of High Court of Bombay.

¶27

8.1) Details of the bank account for payment of cost are as under :-

¶28

Name of Fund	:- Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund.
Bank Name	:- Canara Bank
Branch Name	:- South Block, Defence Headquarters,
	New Delhi-110011.
Account Number	:- 90552010165915
IFSC Code	:- CNRB0019055
Type of Acct	:- Saving

¶29

Petitioners to deposit the said cost within stipulated period as noted above and submit receipts of the same in the Registry of this Court.

¶30

In view of above and subject to payment of costs, Petitions are allowed in terms of prayer clause (b).

¶31

It is made clear that, if the said costs are not paid within stipulated period by either of the parties as mentioned above, the Petitions

¶32

4/5

¶33

sns 3-wp-3633-2024.doc

¶34

shall stand revived automatically and in that event, the Investigating Agency will complete the investigation of present crime expeditiously.

¶35

List the Petitions on board on 13th September 2024, under

¶36

caption ‘for reporting compliance’ of present Order.

¶37

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

¶38

5/5

¶39

Signed by: Raju D. Gaikwad Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 03/09/2024 13:01:40

Vinayak Bhosale v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinayak Bhosale v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Nazir Ahmed Yusuf Mathiya and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Anilkumar Babulal Runthala vs Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors.

Hardik Prabhudas Sagar vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sujata Pramod Mukund Dalvi vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Xyz vs the State of Maharashtra Thro. the Principal Secretay

Dinesh Karsan Anavadiya and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.