Prateek Pandey v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 4333 OF 2024 Prateek Pandey .....Petitioner Vs.
The State Of Maharashtra & Anr.
.....Respondents Mr. Aabad Ponda, Senior Advocate with Mr. Priyank Daga, for the Petitioner.
Smt. Madhavi H. Mhatre, APP, for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Arbaz Pathan with Mr. Pavan Ghatkar, for Respondent No.2. CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL AND DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE : 3rd DECEMBER 2024.
P.C.:- 1) The Petitioner seeks quashing of the Sessions Case No.292 of 2024 pending before the Sessions Court, Mumbai arising out of FIR No.1862 of 2023 dated 25th November 2023 registered with Bandra Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 377, 354-A, 354-D, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. 2) The Petitioner and the Respondent No.2 were in a relationship. According to the Respondent No.2, she met the Petitioner in 2017 and they became friends. Gradually, their friendship 1/5
developed into an intimate relationship. She has alleged in the FIR that they went to various places together and also enjoyed intimate relationship. Eventually, their relationship turned sour and they fell apart. She alleged that from 2023, the Petitioner has stalked her and has threatened her that she should not have relationship with any other person. Because of these threats, she has filed the present FIR. 3) We have perused the FIR and the charge-sheet. It appears that the relationship between the parties had an element of consensus and it was only because of the threats given by the Petitioner after their relationship turned sour, that the Respondent No.2 filed the present FIR.
4) During the pendency of the criminal proceeding, parties have decided to settle the matter amicably. Respondent No.2 is present in the Court and is identified by her counsel. We have also interviewed her and have verified that she is desirous of settling the matter amicably.
5) She has filed an Affidavit dated 23rd September 2024 duly affirmed before a Notary Public. In paragraph 9 thereof, she has stated that she has no objection to the quashing of the FIR and she no longer wishes to pursue any legal action against the Petitioner. She has also 2/5
stated that she has voluntarily consented to the quashing of the FIR and there was no coercion, force or any other form of undue influence involved in any of the interactions.
6) Considering the personal nature of the dispute and also there was consensual relationship between the parties, which turned sour eventually, we are inclined to quash the FIR and the criminal proceeding emanating therefrom. However, since the Police machinery was used unnecessarily, we are inclined to impose cost. 7) As we expressed our opinion for quashing of Sessions Case No.292 of 2024 pending before the Sessions Court, Mumbai arising out of the FIR No.1862 of 2023 dated 25th November 2023 registered with Bandra Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 377, 354-A, 354-D, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 with costs, learned counsel for the Petitioner on instructions submitted that, the Petitioner will pay a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- to the Central Police Welfare Fund of Maharashtra Police 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.
3/5
8) In view thereof, we direct the Petitioner to pay a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- to the Central Police 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.
8.1) Details of the bank account for payment of cost are as under :- Bank Name :- Axis Bank Limited.
Branch Name :- Worli, Mumbai (M.H.), Mumbai-400 025 Account Name :- Central Police Welfare Fund Account Number :- 914010029005759 IFSC Code :- UTIB0000060 8.2) Petitioner to deposit the said cost of Rs.1,00,000/- within stipulated period as noted above and submit receipt of the same in the Registry of this Court.
9) In view of above and subject to payment of cost, Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a).
4/5
10) It is made clear that, if the cost is not paid by the Petitioner within stipulated period as mentioned above, the Petition shall be placed before the Court for further consideration on 17th January 2025. If the cost is paid within that period, there shall be no further reference to the Court.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Digitally signed by SHAMBHAVI NILESH SHIVGAN Date:
2024.12.09 10:16:54 +0530 SHAMBHAVI NILESH SHIVGAN 5/5