Bombay High Court
Vinod S/O Haribhau Rathod And Another vs State Of Maharashtra Through P.S.O. ... on 12 July, 2018
Author: M.G. Giratkar
Bench: P.N. Deshmukh, M.G. Giratkar
1 apl417.13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 417 OF 2013
1. Vinod s/o Haribhau Rathod,
aged about 35 years, Occupation
Service, r/o Kumbharkinhi Darwha
New residing at Hinganghat, Distt.
Wardha.
2. Ganesh Ramesh Rathod,
aged about 40 years, Occupation
Agriculturist, R/o Kumbharkhini,
Darwha, Tq. Darwha, District
Yavatmal. ... APPLICANTS
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra, throughout
PSO, Darwha, Distt. Yavatmal.
2. Vilas Joginsingh Pawar, aged about
52 years, Occupation Service, R/o
Darwha, Kumbharkinhi Punarvasan,
Tq. Darwha, Distt. Yavatmal.
3. Sau. Shilpa Sudhakar Rathod,
aged about 32 years, Occupation
Household work, r/o Pusad, At
present C/o N.A. No.2, Vilas
Pawar, Darwha, Kumbharkinhi
Punarvasan, Tq. Darwha, Distt.
Yavatmal. ... NON-APPLICANTS.
....
Shri A.R. Chavhan, Advocate for the applicants.
Shri A.D. Sonak, Additional Public Prosecutor for non-applicant No.1.
None for non-applicant No.2.
Shri R.M. Patwardhan, Advocate for non-applicant No.3.
....
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2018 01:42:47 :::
2 apl417.13
CORAM : P.N. DESHMUKH AND
M.G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATE OF RESERVING THE JUDGMENT : 06TH JULY, 2018.
DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE JUDGMENT : 12TH JULY, 2018.
JUDGMENT :(Per M.G. Giratkar, J.) By way of present application, the applicants prayed to quash FIR No. 80/2013 registered by Police Station, Darwha, District Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Section 366, 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. It is submitted by the applicants that non-applicant No.2 lodged a report against the applicants alleging that his daughter non- applicant No.3 was abducted by the applicants. Initially missing report was lodged by non-applicant No.2 alleging that his daughter non- applicant No.3 married before seven years. Because of ill treatment of her husband, she left her matrimonial house on 07.06.2013. While coming to the house of non-applicant No.2, both the applicants abducted her. During the course of investigation, non-applicant No.3 gave statement that applicant No.1 confined her in the house at Hinganghat and did sexual intercourse with her. After recording her statement, offence under Section 376 was added.
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2018 01:42:47 :::
3 apl417.13
3. Non-applicant No.3 has filed affidavit, which is taken on record and marked as "X" for identification. In her affidavit, she has stated that she gave statements against the applicants under the compulsion of her father (non-applicant No.2).
4. It is stated in her affidavit that after registration of the offence, she understood her mistake in lodging the report. After the report, she was deserted by her parents as well as her husband. Ultimately, applicant No.1 offered her shelter with the proposal of marriage. Non-applicant No.3 married with applicant No.1 and she has delivered one son namely Mayank on 14.05.2016 from applicant No.1. She is residing with her son in the company of her husband i.e. applicant No.1. In order to lead happy marital life with her husband, she does not want to pursue the matter further. Continuation of the same creates obstacles in her matrimonial life. She has no objection in case FIR registered against the applicants is quashed and set aside.
5. Heard Shri Chavhan, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants. He has pointed out the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mohd. Muzammil Raghib .v. State of Maharashtra and another (reported in 2018 All MR (Cri) 1069). Learned Counsel has submitted that non-applicant No.3 is now wife of ::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2018 01:42:47 ::: 4 apl417.13 applicant No.1. They are residing together. She has delivered child from applicant No.1 In such a situation, continuation of criminal proceedings against the applicants will harm her future life. Therefore, prayed for quashing the FIR registered against the applicants.
6. Heard Shri A.D. Sonak, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of non-applicant No.1/State. He has strongly opposed the prayer. Learned APP has submitted that the statements of witnesses were recorded and it reveals in the statements that applicant Nos.1 and 2 forcibly taken non-applicant No.3. Applicant No.1 confined her and did sexual intercourse against her wish. Therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, FIR cannot be quashed.
7. Today, applicant No.1 along with non-applicant No.3 is present before this Court. Applicant No.3 is having a small child. She has stated before us that now she is married with applicant No.1 and residing with him as his wife. Therefore, she prayed to quash FIR registered against the applicants.
8. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Mohd. Muzammil Raghib .v. State of Maharashtra (cited supra) has held as under:-
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2018 01:42:47 :::
5 apl417.13 "FIR lodged against applicant alleging that applicant had physical relationship with non-applicant on false pretext of marriage. However, after lodging FIR parties amicably settled dispute and married each other. Continuation of criminal proceedings would come in way of their peaceful married life. Hence, FIR quashed."
It is further observed as under :-
"4. However, it appears that after lodging of the FIR, matter has been amicably settled. The parties have married to each other and are residing together. A copy of "Nikah Nama" as well the photograph of the marriage are placed on record.
5. The applicant as well as non-applicant No.2 are personally present in the Court. They reiterate that the matter has been amicably settled between them and they are residing together.
6. The Aopex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675 : [2003 ALL MR (Cri) 1162 (S.C.] has held that if the matrimonial dispute has been settled between the parties, this Court can exercise powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash and give an end to the criminal proceedings.
7. In that view of the matter, we find that continuation of the criminal proceedings would unnecessary ::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2018 01:42:47 ::: 6 apl417.13 come in the way of peaceful married life of the parties. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the present case is a fit case where this Court can exercise powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code and give an end to the criminal proceedings. Hence, the application deserves to be allowed."
9. In the present case, applicant No.1 married with non- applicant No.3. They are residing together as husband and wife. Continuation of criminal proceedings against the applicants would come in the way of their peaceful married life. Hence, the FIR lodged against the applicants is liable to be quashed and set aside. Therefore, we proceed to pass the following order.
O R D E R Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). FIR No. 80/2013 dated 09.06.2013, registered by non-applicant No.1-Police Station, Darwha, District Yavatmal, for the offence punishable under Sections 366, 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside.
JUDGE JUDGE
*rrg.
::: Uploaded on - 13/07/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2018 01:42:47 :::