Priya Amol Jarhad v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2025:BHC-AUG:26148-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1526 OF 2024 Priya Amol Jarhad

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra And Another Mr. G. A. Kulkarni, APP for respondent-State Mr. S. L. Bhapkar, Advocate for respondent No. 3 CORAM : Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi & Hiten S. Venegavkar, JJ.

DATE : 19th September, 2025 PER COURT :- 1.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner is absent 2.

Petition has been filed for issuance of writ or for direction to respondent No. 2, the Police Authority to decide the application of the petitioner dated 27.03.2024.3. The learned APP objects the same 3.

Perusal of the representation/letter dated 27.03.2024 would show that the petitioner, who is the original informant has reiterated the allegations in the F.I.R and according to her, her pregnancy was illegally terminated and, therefore, appropriate section ought to have been inserted. In her letter/representation she stated that the police had requested a medical report 90-Cri WP-1526-2024.odt

from the doctor concerning the medical termination of pregnancy, however, she only possessed the sonography report. She states that when she contacted concerned Doctor, the Doctor refused, stating that the termination was not done in her hospital.

4.

We do not want to go much into those details from the contents of the said representation also it can be seen that the petitioner had no evidence with her regarding illegal termination of pregnancy which she tried to say. It was because of the administration of the peels. No question of direction to decide the said application would then arise. 5.

Under such circumstance, writ petition stands dismissed. (Hiten S. Venegavkar, J.) ( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.) bsj 90-Cri WP-1526-2024.odt