Sandeep Suresh Pawar v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

: 1 :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.5180 OF 2025 Sandeep Suresh Pawar .....Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another .....Respondents ----- Mr. Rohan S. Darade, Advocate i/b. Sidheshwar Biradar for the Petitioner.

Ms. Sharmila S. Kaushik, APP for the Respondent No.1-State. Ms.Radhali Kadam, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. ----- CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.

DATE : 10th OCTOBER, 2025 P.C. :

1.

Leave to amend to mask the identity of the Respondent No.2 in the cause title.

2.

This is a Petition for quashing of the proceedings arising out of C.R. No.159/2025 registered at Kurla Police Station, Mumbai under sections 69, 77, 115(2), 316(2), 351(2) and 352 of BNS as well as the consequent criminal prosecution arising therefrom. The FIR is lodged by the Respondent No.2.

Deshmane(PS)

: 2 :

3.

Heard Mr. Rohan Darade, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Ms. Sharmila Kaushik, learned APP for the Respondent No.1-State and Ms.Radhali Kadam, learned counel for the Respondent No.2.

4.

It is not necessary to refer to the allegations in the FIR in detail because the parties have agreed to settle the mater and we find that there is an element of consent in the allegations made in the FIR. Briefly stated, the FIR lodged by the Respondent No.2 mentions that she had got married earlier, but she lost her husband in January, 2022. The Petitioner was her childhood friend. They got in touch through a social networking site. Since she had lost her husband, she was mentally disturbed. The Petitioner took advantage of the situation and won her trust. He was already married with three children. He represented to her that his wife had permitted him to get married with the informant. The FIR thereafter goes on to mention different instances where the Petitioner established physical relations with her at different places. He started abusing and assaulting her but since he had promised to marry her, she ignored his behaviour. There are allegations that he had taken some financial assistance and had taken her ornaments. He used to

: 3 :

pressurize her on the basis of some photographs as well. On these allegations, the FIR is lodged. The charge-sheet is filed. It basically reiterates the allegations made in the FIR. There are statements of the neighbours who had seen them together.

5.

The parties have now settled the dispute. The Respondent No.2 has filed her affidavit. She has given her no objeciton for quashing of these proceedings. She has stated that she had received a mutually decided sum of Rs.1,40,000/- as full and final settlement of her monetary claims.

6.

Learned APP submitted that she had interacted with the Respondent No.2 and she is satisfied that the prayer for quashing of the proceedings and her no objection for the same, is genuine. She has no apprehension of the photographs as the charge-sheet does not refer to any photographs.

7.

Considering that both the parties have given up their differences and they have decided to settle the matter, we are inclined to allow this Petition.

8.

Hence, the following order:

: 4 :

:: O R D E R ::

i.

The FIR being C.R. No.159/2025 registered at Kurla Police Station, Mumbai as well as the consequent prosecution arising therefrom being Sessions Case No.509/2025 pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Mumbai, are quashed and set aside.

ii.

The Petition is disposed of accordingly.

( SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) Deshmane (PS) PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE Date: 2025.10.14 17:15:58 +0530