Sujitsinh Shivrajsinh Rajejadhavrao v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

Gokhale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 992 OF 2025 Sujitsinh Shivrajsinh Rajejadhavrao ..Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

..Respondents __________ Mr. Veerdhawal Kakade for Applicant.

Ms. Sangeeta D. Shinde, APP for State/Respondent. Ms. Suchita R. Chavan i/b. Shekhar V. Mane for the Respondent No.2.

__________ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.

DATE : 14 OCTOBER 2025 PC :

1.

This is an application for quashing of the F.I.R. registered vide C.R.No.678 of 2024 at Chatushrungi police station, on 11.08.2024, under sections 376 and 376(2)(n) of the I.P.C. and the resultant proceedings bearing R.C.C.No.4584 of 2024 pending before the J.M.F.C., Pune. The case is not yet committed to the Court of Session.

2.

Heard Mr. Veerdhawal Kakade, learned counsel for the Applicant, Ms. Sangeeta Shinde, learned APP for the State and Digitally signed by VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE Date:

2025.10.15 10:55:45 +0530 VINOD BHASKAR GOKHALE

Ms.Suchita Chavan, learned counsel for the Respondent No.2. 3.

It is not necessary to refer to the allegations in detail because the parties have arrived at settlement and the Respondent No.2 who had lodged the F.I.R. has given her clear no objection for quashing of the proceedings. Briefly stated, the allegations in the F.I.R. dated 11.08.2024 are that, about three years prior to the lodging of the F.I.R. she came in contact with the Applicant through a social networking site. Their acquaintances developed into the friendship and then into a love relationship. At that time, she was already in relationship with another boy, but the Applicant was successful in persuading her to be with him. Both of them were belonging to different religions and there was age gap of 10 years. She was elder to him. She has clearly stated in the F.I.R. that they were in love. They started living together. The F.I.R.

mentions that they were staying together for about 5 months from June 2023. They had their physical relations frequently. After October 2023, she saw change in his behaviour. There used to be some quarrels between them. In May 2024, she came to know that he was having relationship with another girl.

consume pesticide. The Applicant promissed to behave properly. He kept his promise only for a month and then he started avoiding her.

4.

On 31.07.2024, she was not well and was admitted to hospital. The Applicant came to meet her. He told her that, he was not interested in residing with her. Therefore, she lodged the F.I.R. on the ground that he had made a false promise of marriage and had kept physical relations.

5.

The investigation was conducted and the charge-sheet was filed. The charge-sheet contains the statements of the Applicant's friends and the friends of the informant. They had supported the theory that the Applicant and the Respondent No.2 were in relationship. From the charge-sheet it appears that there was a consensual relationship. In spite of his reluctance to get married, they continued to come together for a long period. Therefore, there was clear element of consent. 6.

In this background, the Respondent No.2 has filed her Affidavit in this application mentioning that she has no objection

for quashing of these proceedings. The Affidavit is affirmed before the Assistant Registrar of this Court. In paragraph-4 of the Affidavit, she has stated that, around 2022, they got acquainted with each other. It turned into love relationship, which led to consensual physical relationship between them. There was some misunderstanding. She realised that because of their age difference and difference in religions, they were not compatible with each other. She has further stated that, she was now happily married and was living a normal and a happy life with her husband. She has further stated that, she has no objection if the proceedings are quashed and set aside.

7.

Learned APP has interacted with the Respondent No.2. Learned APP submitted that the Respondent No.2 is genuinely desirous of giving no objection for quashing of these proceedings. 8.

Considering the clear stand taken by the Respondent No.2 in her Affidavit and the background which we have noted herein above, we are inclined to allow this application. 9.

Hence, the following order:

O R D E R

i) The F.I.R. registered vide C.R.No.678 of 2024 at Chatushrungi police station, on 11.08.2024, under sections 376 and 376(2)(n) of the I.P.C. and the resultant proceedings bearing R.C.C.No.4584 of 2024 pending before the J.M.F.C., Pune, are quashed and set aside.

ii) The Application is disposed of.

(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)