Akanksha Ajit Parab v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1994 OF 2025 Smt.Akanksha Ajit Parab

...Petitioner

Versus

SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR The State of Maharashtra and Another

...Respondents

SATISH RAMCHANDRA SANGAR Date: 2025.04.17 14:35:59 +0530 ***** Mr.Irfan Ansari Abdul Aziz a/w Mr.Abdul Kalam AnsariAdvocates for Petitioner. Smt.M.M.Deshmukh-APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr.Afsar Ansari i/b. Mr.Vaibhav Shah-Advocate for Respondent No.2.

Mr.Sushil Sudhir More - PSI - Chembur Police Station. ***** CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & S.M.MODAK, JJ.

DATE : 9th APRIL 2025 P.C. :

1.

This is a Petition for quashing of the proceedings arising out of the C.R. No.156 of 2025 registered at Chembur Police Station on 23rd March 2025 under Sections 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and under Section 118(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ("BNS"). The F.I.R. is lodged by the Respondent No.2. He has stated that his daughter is aged 11 years old studying in a

school at Chembur in 5th standard. On 21st March 2025, she was slapped with a ruler by the Petitioner who was teaching in that class because the informant's daughter was talking in the class and was not following the discipline.

On these allegations, the F.I.R. is lodged.

2.

The informant / Respondent No.2 has now filed an Affidavit of consent mentioning that the F.I.R. was lodged due to misunderstanding and that, he has no objection for quashing the proceedings. He has mentioned in the Affidavit that he has realised his inadvertent mistake in lodging the F.I.R. and that, he was no more interested in proceeding with the F.I.R. 3.

The Respondent No.2 is present in the Court. He is identified by his learned counsel. The Respondent No.2 has stated before the Court, that he has no objection if the proceedings are quashed. The incident appears to be a result of some misunderstanding as is stated by the informant in his Affidavit. There is nothing to show, that the child has suffered any injuries. The informant himself has stated, that the F.I.R. is lodged through some misunderstanding and that, he did not want to proceed with the F.I.R.

4.

Considering this situation, it would be in the

interest of justice, if the proceedings are quashed. Hence, following order:-

O R D E R

(i) The proceedings arising out of C.R. No.156 of 2025 are quashed and set aside.

5.

With these observations, the Petition is disposed of. (S.M.MODAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)