Sudhakar Vinayak Hood v. State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Wardha City Tq. And Dist.Wardha And Another

2023:BHC-NAG:16623 1 revn 225.2023.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.

Criminal Revision Application No.

of 20 [Sudhakar Vinayak Hood ..vs.. State of Maharashtra, thr. its P.S.O., Wardha City, Tq. & Dist. Wardha and anr.] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. Zoher Shakir, Advocate for the applicant Mr. A. R. Chutake, APP for the State/non-applicant no. 1 CORAM : ANIL L. PANSARE J .

DATED : 30-11 -202 By the present application, the applicant is questioning the order dated 28-6-2023 passed by learned Sessions Court, Wardha whereby the application filed by the applicant seeking discharge for the offences punishable under Section 366, 376, 383, 384, 417, 420, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 3(1)(xi) and 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was partly allowed. The applicant came to be discharged for offences punishable under Sections 366, 383, 384 and 504 of the IPC. However, his request seeking discharge for other offences has been rejected.

2.

One of the serious allegations against the applicant is that he has repeatedly committed sexual intercourse with the informant/victim who was required to file application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the reason that her complaint dated 17-10-2018 made to Superintendent of Police, Wardha was not acted upon.

2 revn 225.2023.odt 3.

Perusal of complaint and the documents placed before me would prima facie indicate that the victim, who is/was 35 years old, has been exploited by the applicant, aged 66 years, either by threatening her of making the photographs and video clips taken by the applicant while indulging into sexual activities with the victim viral. The statement/complaint would further indicate that the applicant has exploited the victim on the pretext of marriage as also of giving employment to her.

4.

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant seeks permission to withdraw the application. Permission granted.

5.

The application is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Anil L. Pansare, J.) wasnik