IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5173 OF 2018 Mr. Subodh Medsikar ] Aged 55 years, Occupation – Service, ] Residing at A/41, Nilgiri Heights, ] Shivaji Housing Society, Senapati Bapat Road, ]

Pune – 411 016. ] … Petitioner V/s.

1. The State of Maharashtra ]

Through the Office of Chief Public ] Prosecutor, the High Court at Bombay, ] Mumbai. ]

2. The Senior Inspector of Police ]

Incharge of Chikhali Police Station, ] Pimpri-Chinchwad, Pune. ]

3. Ms. Sheetal Devidas Gosavi ]

Assistant Inspector of Motor Vehicle, ] Residing at Flat No. A-1, Sahil Residency, ] B-Bldg. Sector-9, Moshi Pradhikaran, ]

Chinchwad, Pune – 412 105. ] … Respondents _______________________________________

Ms. Pinaz C. Contractor a/w. Hitekshi Y. Bhanushali for Petitioner.

Mr. Rhishikesh Pethe, A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State.

Mr. Rushikesh G. Patil for Respondent No.3.

_______________________________________

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 9^th June 2025.

J UDGMENT ( P er : A. S. Gadkari , J. ) :-

1) By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, the Petitioner seeks quashing of R.C.C. No. 445 of 2019, pending on the file of learned 5^th Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pimpri, District Pune, arising out of CR No. 15 of 2018 dated 17^th October 2018 registered with Chikhali Police Station, Pimpri-Chinchwad Police Commissionerate, for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 354(A)(1)(i), 354-D(1)(i), 506 & 509 of Indian Penal Code.

2) Heard Ms. Contractor, learned Advocate for Petitioner, Mr. Pethe, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 and Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for Respondent No.3. Perused entire record.

3) Record clearly indicates that, at the time of admission of the Petition i.e. on 17^th April 2023, Advocate Mr. Rushikesh G. Patil had waived notice on behalf of Respondent No.3. The note put up by the Registry dated 24^th September 2024 mentions that, “Rule writ issued”. It is thus clear that, the Respondent No.3 has been duly served with the Notice of Petition.

3.1) Record further indicates that, present Petition was taken up for hearing on 14^th June 2024, when none had appeared for Respondent No.3 and in order to grant an opportunity to the Respondent No.3, the Petition was adjourned. Despite service, today also none appears for Respondent No.3.

4) Shorn of unnecessary details, the brief facts giving rise to the present Petition can be summarized as follows :-

4.1) That, in the year 2017-18 the Petitioner was working as Assistant Regional Transport Officer in the Office of Deputy Regional Transport Office, Pimpri-Chinchwad and was looking after the day-to-day working and the operations of the Office, as per the law and Rules prescribed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Respondent No.3 was also working in the same office, as Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector eight months prior to the date of lodgment of the crime.

4.2) The Petitioner had issued four Show Cause Memos between 9^th June 2017 to 11^th July 2017 to the Respondent No.3 for her dereliction in duty and for not performing the duty as required under the Rules. The said Memos are annexed at page Nos. 49 to 61 to the Petition.

4.3) Respondent No.3 thereafter lodged a complaint on 11^th July 2017 with the concerned Committee (Competent Authority ) established under The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (For short, “the said Act”) alleging sexual harassment at working place. The concerned Authority of the employer of the Petitioner therefore formed an internal Committee constituting 7 members and conducted in-depth enquiry into the allegations made by the Respondent No.3.

4.4) The said Committee apart from recording statement of Respondent No.3 and the Petitioner, also recorded statements of other witnesses and in its report dated 16^th October 2017 came to the conclusion that the Respondent No.3 had produce