Back
AVINASH G. GHAROTE, ABHAY J. MANTRI
Narendra Kumar Santraj Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Per : ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.)
Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. The applicant seeks to quash the First Information Report (for short- ‘FIR’) dated 29-04-2021 in Crime No.125/2021 registered at Achalpur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 354-A and 354-D of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short -‘IPC’), filing of the charge-sheet bearing No.31/2021 and registration of the Regular Criminal Case (for short- ‘RCC’) No.184/2021 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.3, Achalpur pursuant the said FIR.
3. The facts of the case are as under :
(b) On 29-04-2021, non-applicant No.2 lodged a report against the applicant, alleging that the applicant intentionally harassed her; he would look at her with evil eyes and abuse her with filthy words, thereby making her ashamed of herself. He also used to tell her that she looks sexy in a saree.
(c) Based on the complai
Vague allegations of harassment do not constitute a prima facie case for prosecution under IPC Sections 354-A and 354-D, especially when supported by exonerating enquiry findings.
The court established that allegations of sexual harassment against the applicants were baseless and lacked credible evidence, thus quashing the FIR.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that if the allegations in the FIR do not prima facie constitute a case against the accused, the proceedings can be quashed.
The court clarified that for offences under the Atrocities Act, allegations must occur in public view, and prosecution can be quashed in part based on the sufficiency of evidence.
The court quashed the charge sheet as the allegations of sexual harassment were found to be vague and lacking corroborative evidence, indicating a misuse of the criminal process.
The court emphasized that for offences under the Atrocities Act, the alleged insult must occur in public view, which was not established in this case.
(1) Registration of multiple FIRs assumes importance, thereby attracting issue of wreaking vengeance out of private or personal grudge.(2) Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of....
The court quashed the FIR against the petitioner, finding no evidence of sexual harassment or conspiracy, emphasizing the lack of mens rea and the frivolous nature of the allegations.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
