Aniket Arun Jadhav v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

35-WP-886-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 886 OF 2024 Aniket Arun Jadhav

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra And Anr.

...Respondents

....

Mr.Manish Gaikwad a/w Mr.Mohammed Naved I. Mulla, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mrs.Megha S. Bajoria, A.P.P. for the Respondent No.1- State. ....

CORAM

:

N. R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

6th MAY, 2024.

P.C.

:

1.

This Petition takes exception to the order dated 12.10.2023 in Regular Criminal Case No.51 of 2023 by which the trial Court has framed the charges against the Petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 354-A & 506 of Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC").

2.

The learned counsel for Petitioner submits that the Petitioner and victim were in amorous relationship. It is submitted that the victim is a relative of one Shreyas Mohire against whom the petitioner has lodged the report for assault etc. The present case is thus nothing but a counterblast to the FIR lodged by the Petitioner. Digitally signed by SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR Date:

2024.05.07 14:20:10 +0530 It is submitted that to avoid an abuse of process of law, SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR Sajakali Jamadar

35-WP-886-2024.doc order impugned needs to be quashed and set aside. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel for the Petitioner has relied upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 07.05.2021 in Criminal Appeal No.472 of 2021. 3.

I have perused the FIR. The victim has stated that on the date of incident, which took place on 04.04.2023, the present petitioner came to her house, he caught hold of her hand and demanded sexual fevour. She has further alleged that when she refused to accede to his demand, she was threatened. The trial Court has thus rightly framed the charges against the Petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 354-A & 506 of IPC. The defence of the petitioner that they were in relationship or filing of false case cannot be considered at this stage. 4.

In view of the above, no interference is called for in the impugned order. Writ Petition is dismissed.

(N. R. BORKAR, J.) Sajakali Jamadar