##PAGE1##

2026:BHC-NAG:2051-DB

apl 75-2022 J..doc 1/8

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.75/2022

1. Tushar s/o Vijay Wankhede,

aged about 34 years, Occ.

Private,

2. Sou. Jyoti w/o Vijay Wankhede,

Aged about 47 years,

Both R/o K.K. Lifestyle

Apartment, Flat No.IRS0001,

Opposite Gurudwara, Near

Water Bank, Wadi, Amravati

Road, Nagpur, at present

R/o Qtr. No.2, Primary

Health Centre, Satgaon,

Sakhartola, Tah. Salekasa,

District Gondia.

... APPLICANTS

...VERSUS…

1. State of Maharashtra,

Through its S.D.P.O./ Police

Station Officer, Police Station,

Salekasa, Tah. Salekasa,

District Gondia

2. Sou. Mariyam Pruthwiraj

Shivankar, age about 44 years,

Occ. Household, R/o. Sakharitola,

Tah. Salekasa, District Gondia

...NON-APPLICANTS

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

Shri V.S. Gokhale, Advocate h/f Shri R.J. Shinde, Advocate for applicant

Shri M.J. Khan, APP for non-applicant No.1/State

Ms Kaushik R. Gadge, Advocate (appointed) for non-applicant No.2

apl 75-2022 J..doc 2/8

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

CORAM : PRAVIN S . PATIL , J .

DATED : 04.02.2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard. By consent of the parties, this matter is taken

for final disposal at admission stage.

2. By this application, the applicant seeks to quash and

set aside charge-sheet No.44/2019 arising out of Crime No.44/2019

registered with Police Station Salekasa, district Gondia, for the

offences punishable under Section 354(a)(b), 294, 504, 506 and 34

of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The applicant No.1 is the son of Dr. Vijay Wankhede,

applicant No.2 is wife of Vijay Wankhede, who is working as a

Medical Officer at Primary Health Centre (P.H.C.) Sategaon, Tah.

Salekasa, District Gondia. According to them, the alleged incident

which was registered against is counterblast to the complaint

lodged by applicant No.2 against the husband of non-applicant

apl 75-2022 J..doc 3/8

No.2. All allegations are false and only with an intention to falsely

implicate them in the criminal offence, therefore, seek indulgence

of this Court in the matter.

4. The case of the prosecution in short is that the villagers

along with Sarpanch and other persons came at P.H.C. Salekasa

along with Amrapali Patre for the purpose of her delivery. At that

time, Dr. Vijay Wankhede was not available at P.H.C. Therefore, he

was given a phone call and after 20 to 25 minutes of a phone call,

he reached to P.H.C. After reaching to P.H.C., he has started to take

care of Amrapali in the operation theater. After that, it is alleged

that the present applicant No.2 came to P.H.C. hall and made

allegations against the person as to why they are making allegations

against her husband as he is always available at P.H.C. After that

applicant No.1 reached with a three wheeler scooter and stopped

the scooter near to the non-applicant No.2 and tried to outrage her

modesty. As such, on the basis of this incident, the offence came to

be registered against the present applicants in the matter.

5. In light of the allegations made in the matter, it will be

relevant to first consider whether Section 354 (a)(b) of the Indian

apl 75-2022 J..doc 4/8

Penal Code is attracted in the matter and what are the necessary

ingredients required for attracting the offence under Section 354(a)

(b) of the Indian Penal Code. In this regard, it would be relevant to

rely the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case

of Naresh Aneja aliad Naresh Kumar Aneja Vs. State of Uttar

Pradesh and another reported in (2025) 2 SCC 604, wherein the

Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed in paragraph Nos. 20 to 22 as

under:

“20. A bare perusal of Section 354 IPC reveals that for it

to apply, the offence must be committed against a

woman; criminal force must be applied against her; and

such application of force must be with the intent to

outrage her modesty. [See: Raju Pandurang Mahale v.

State of Maharashtra]

21. "Criminal force" is defined i