Ajit Suresh Bhosale v. The State Of Maharashra And ANR

18-cr-apl-480-22.doc Digitally signed by DINESH SADANAND SHERLA Date:

2022.08.04 15:00:00 +0500

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

DINESH SADANAND SHERLA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 480 OF 2022 Ajit S. Bhosale ... Applicant V/s.

The State of Maharashtra and anr.

... Respondents ---------------- Ms Meghna Gowalani for the Applicant.

Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa, APP for the Respondent/State. Mr. Mahesh Zawar for Respondent No.2.

----------------

CORAM

:

NITIN JAMDAR & N.R. BORKAR, JJ.

DATE :

3 AUGUST 2022.

P.C.

.

By this criminal application, the Applicant is seeking to quash FIR bearing No. 787 of 2021 lodged by Respondent No.2 with Hinjewadi Police Station, Pimpri-Chinchwad against the Applicant for the offence punishable under Section 354-A of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

The learned Counsel for the Applicant states that the ground for quashing the FIR is that the Respondent No2 - Complainant has given her consent. This fact is confirmed by the learned Counsel representing the Respondent - Complainant.

Dinesh Sherla 1/2

18-cr-apl-480-22.doc 3.

The learned counsel for the parties state that the dispute does not have large scale implication on the society and in the light of consent of Respondent No.2, FIR be quashed.

4.

The Respondent No.2 had filed the FIR stating that the Respondent No2 while purchasing groceries in the departmental store, the Petitioner standing in queue had touched her inappropriately and thereby committed the offence. 5.

The Respondent No.2 has filed affidavit of consent. Respondent No.2 has stated that she is giving no objection for quashing the FIR. The learned counsel for Respondent No.2 states that the incident occurred out of misunderstanding and Respondent No.2 has accepted the Petitioner's stand that it was due to misunderstanding. In light of this stand taken by Respondent No.2, Criminal Application deserves to be allowed as keeping the prosecution pending would be needless harassment to the parties and it is not likely to result in conviction. 6.

Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (c). Order accordingly.

(N.R. BORKAR, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.) Dinesh Sherla 2/2