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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 5934

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE URMILA SACHIN JOSHI- PHALKEHON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NANDESH SHANKARRAO DESHPANDE
MIRZA ASLAM BEIGH RASHID BEG AND OTHERS. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO TELHARA PS TELHARA DIST WASHIM AND OTHERS. – Respondent
APL/1128/2025



2025:BHC-NAG:9835-DB (1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.1128 OF 2025

1. Mirza Aslam Beigh Rashid Beigh, Aged 29 Years, Occupation : Labourer, R/o. Ward No.1, Near Jama Masjid, Taluka Malegaon, District Washim.

2. Shaikh Shafique Shaikh Barkat, Aged 45 Years, Occupation: Labourer, 3. Shaheda Bi Shaikh Shafique, Aged 43 Years, Occupation: Household, A2 & A3 both R/o Ghodegaon, Taluka Telhara, District Akola. ..... APPLICANTS // VERSUS //

1. State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Officer, Telhara Police Station, Taluka Telhara, District Akola.

2. Rahul Popatrao Tayade (Complainant)

Aged 42 Years, Occupation : Police Constable, Telhara Police Station, Taluka Telhara, District Akola.

3. XYZ (Prosecutrix in Cr. No.196/2025)

Police Station Telhara, Taluka Telhara, District Akola. ....NON-APPLICANTS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mr. S. V. Sirpurkar, Counsel for the applicants.

Ms. Sneha Dhote, APP for the non-applicant No.1/State. Mr. Yash Venkatraman, Counsel for non-applicant no.3.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.

RESERVED ON : 11.09.2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 26.09.2025 JUDGMENT : (PER: URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)

(2

1. Present applicants seek exception to challenge, at the initial stage, the First Information Report (for short “the FIR”) in connection with Crime No.196/2025 registered with Telhara Police Station, District Akola, on 02.07.2025, for the offence punishable under Section 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, under Sections 4(1) and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (for short ‘the POCSO Act’) and under Sections 9, 10, 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.

2. Brief fact which are necessary for the disposal of the application are as under:

Police Head Constable Rahul Tayade attached to Telhara Police Station lodged report at Police Station, Telhara on 01.07.2025 informing that on 24.06.2025, he received an information that, the victim had delivered a baby boy at Fatima Nursing Home, Akola on 10.05.2025. The age of the victim at the time of marriage was 17 years. Her marriage was solemnized with accused Mirza Aslam Beigh. As per his allegations, she was subjected for the forceful sexual assault when she was minor. On the basis of the said report, Police have registered the crime against the present applicants.

3. The present application is filed by the applicants, who is husband and other family members, on the ground that there was a love affair between the applicant No.1 and the victim. After the (3 families became aware about the said love affair, they performed the marriage of the applicant No.1 with the victim according to the Muslim rites and rituals on 02.06.2024. On the said date, the victim was yet to complete the age of 18 years, hence the marriage came to be legally registered after she completed the age of 18 years. As per the ground raised in the application that out of a love affair, the applicant No.1 and the non-applicant No.3 have performed the marriage. There was a physical relationship between them which resulted into the delivery of a child by the victim girl and now the marriage has already been performed between them. If the applicant is prosecuted and punished, then she herself and her child would suffer as there is no one to look after them. There is remote possibilities that she will be accepted by him if she stays in the society. The non-applicant No.3 has no objection for the same. She appeared through her Counsel and raised no objection on the ground that the applicant No.1 has not subjected her for the forceful sexual assault at any point of time. As far as the applicant Nos.2 and 3 are concerned, they have no connection with the alleged offence and therefore, the non-applicant No.3 has no objection to quash the FIR.

4. Heard learned Counsel Mr. Sirpu

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 Back to top