Jitendra Bhaskar Marathe vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr.

Admit.

The applicant seeks quashing of First Information Report bearing Crime No.0481/2026 registered with Police Station, Rajapeth, District Amravati City, for the offences punishable under Section 64(2)(m) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on the ground of mutual settlement.

The First Information Report indicates that non-applicant no.2/complainant, who is aged about 35 years, had become acquainted with the applicant in 2016 when she was working at a Vivo Mobile Store, Pune, where the applicant was imparting training in mobile repairing and handling. It is alleged that the applicant continued to meet her thereafter. According to the complainant, in March 2023, when the wallet of the applicant was found in the purse of the complainant, a quarrel took place between the complainant and her husband and therefore, her husband left for Amravati. The applicant took the complainant to Amravati on the pretext of clearing the misunderstanding with her husband and relatives, but instead, he took her to Aradhana Lodge at Rajapeth Chowk, Amravati and allegedly established physical relations with her against her will. It is further alleged that, on 16.07.2024, the applicant took her to Ujjain, where he secretly took objectionable photos of her and thereafter, threatened to circulate the photographs/videos in order to compel her to have physical relations with him. On 28.05.2026, the applicant contacted her telephonically and threatened her to continue physical relations with him. Therefore, on the complaint of the complainant, the aforesaid offence came to be lodged against the applicant.

In response to the notice, the complainant is present in the Court today. She has been duly identified by her counsel. She has filed an affidavit dated 14.08.2026 on record. The complainant, reiterating contents of the affidavit, submits that the matter has been amicably settled out of the Court between the parties and she does not wish to prosecute the applicant. The complainant has contended in her affidavit that she is acquainted with the applicant since the last 10 years. During the said period, they developed consensual sexual relationship. However, the said fact came to the knowledge of her husband and her relatives. Therefore, she lodged the complaint under the pressure of her family members.

Perusal of the affidavit reveals that the matter has been settled between the applicant and the complainant. The complainant does not want to prosecute the applicant in the criminal case and she has no objection if the FIR and the consequent proceedings are quashed.

No doubt, the alleged offence is a heinous crime, however, the Supreme Court in the case of Madhukar and others Vs. State of Maharashtra and another ^{11.2025 SCC OnLine SC 1415} in para 6 has observed as under:

In view of the legal position enumerated above, the facts of each case are required to be seen.

In the present case, it can be seen that non-applicant No.2 is a major and a married woman. The relationship between the applicant and the complainant continued for a considerable period. The complainant accompanied the applicant to Amravati and then to Ujjain out of her free will. It is only when her husband saw the wallet of the applicant in the purse of non-applicant No.2, that the present FIR came to be lodged. Therefore, the possibility that the relationship between the applicant and non-applicant No.2 was consensual cannot be ruled out.

Considering the facts mentioned above, coupled with the fact that the matter is settled between the parties and the fact that the complainant is a married lady having two children, continuation of the present proceedings may become a hindrance in her future life. Therefore, a case is made out for exercising the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to quash the FIR and consequent proceedings. Hence, the following order is passed: