Umesh S/O. Manohar Ratnam v. Through Its Police Station Officer, Midc Nagpur City Police Station

2024:BHC-NAG:8743-DB 1 915.apl.1034.24-J.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1034 OF 2024 Umesh S/o. Manohar Ratnam, Age 29 years, Occ. : Service (Indian Army), R/o. At. Chhallewada, Ta. Aheri, Dist. Gadchiroli.

... APPLICANT ...VERSUS...

1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Police Station Officer, MIDC Nagpur City Police Station, Nagpur, Dist. Nagpur.

2. Chandani D/o. Mahendra Bansod, Age 25 years, Occ. : Student, R/o. At Chhallewada, Ta. Aheri, Dist. Gadchiroli.

...NON-APPLICANTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. S. D. Borkute, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. A. A. Madiwale, A.P.P. for Non-applicant/State. Mr. D. N. Mudgale, Advocate for Non-applicant No.2. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.

DATED :- 07.08.2024 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER :

VINAY JOSHI , J.

) :- 1.

Heard.

2.

ADMIT. The matter is taken up for final disposal by consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties.

2 915.apl.1034.24-J.odt 3.

This is an application seeking to quash charge-sheet (R.C.C. No.213/2024) arising out of First Information Report No. 0547/2024 registered with Police Station M.I.D.C., Nagpur City for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, on merits as well as on settlement.

4.

The informant lady aged 25 years has lodged the report alleging that under false pretext of marriage, she has been sexually exploited. It is the informant's case that in the year 2017, she got acquainted with the applicant and then love relationship was developed. From the year 2021, they used to meet on and often. During several meetings, the applicant had established sexual relations by assuring to marry. It is her contention that the applicant is serving in Armed Forces, who never performed his promise, but finally in the year 2024, refused to marry by stating that his family is not agreeable for marriage.

5.

The learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that the informant is well matured lady and both were in relationship from last six to seven years. It is submitted that the contention about sexual exploitation on false pretext of marriage is untenable. The informant has submitted herself out of relationship. Moreover, it is contended that due to differences or misunderstanding, the First Information Report was lodged, but by the time, both got married with each other on 18.07.2024.

3 915.apl.1034.24-J.odt 6.

Perusal of the investigation paper discloses that both were in relationship from last six years. They met at various places and had sexual relations. It is not the case that, the applicant since inception did not intend to marry. It reveals that the applicant is serving in Armed Forces and, therefore, he was away for longer period. However, by the time, he stood to his assurances by performing marriage. The copy of marriage invitation card and marriage certificate has been produced to show that on 18.07.2024 both got married. Moreover, the informant lady is present before us, who stated that out of misunderstanding she has lodged report and now she is living with the applicant as a husband and wife. The informant lady has also filed affidavit stating that out of misunderstanding she had lodged report but she do not want to prosecute. The informant appeared before us and asserted about the contents of the affidavit with the urge of quashing.

7.

Taking overall view of the matter, it reveals that the material does not indicate that only because the applicant assured her marriage, the informant submitted herself. Rather it reveals that out of long standing relationship, the parties have maintained sexual relations. Inasmuch as the applicant has married with informant and they are residing together. Certainly, continuation of prosecution would be at the detriment of matrimonial life of the parties. The essentials to constitute the offence are missing. In the circumstances, we hold that the continuation of the

4 915.apl.1034.24-J.odt prosecution would be an abuse of process of Court. Hence, the following order:

i] The application is allowed.

We hereby quash and set aside the charge-sheet (R.C.C. No.213/2024) arising out of First Information Report No. 0547/2024 registered with Police Station M.I.D.C., Nagpur City for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code.

8.

Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of accordingly. (MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.) RGurnule Signed by: Mrs. R.M. MANDADE Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 09/08/2024 16:03:24