SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Bom) 1844

VINAY JOSHI, VALMIKI SA MENEZES
Vinod – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
S.M. Patrikar, Advocate, V.A. Thakare, Advocate, Mayuri Kulkarni, Advocate

JUDGMENT/ORDER

VINAY JOSHI, J. - Heard.

2. Admit.

3. This is an application in term of Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code') seeking to quash First information Report ('FIR') as well as charge-sheet relating to Crime No. 293/2019 for the offence punishable under Ss. 376, 354, 506, 109, 509 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered with Police Station Chimur, Tah. Chimur, Dist. Chandrapur.

4. It is applicant's case that the entire allegations of sexual assault are against co-accused Sudhakar. Besides vague reference about applicants conversation with victim at the instance of co-accused Sudhir, there is nothing against him. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that, the material collected by the Police fells short to make out prima facie case against the applicant. Continuation of such prosecution amounts to abuse of the process of the Court, and therefore, the quashing is sought.

5. Learned APP as well as learned counsel appearing for the informant resisted the application. It is submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Sec. 164 of the Code, has specifically stated about sexual assault on the part of the applicant. It is sub

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top