Bombay High Court
RAVI VINAYAK RAKSHANKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The High Court exercised its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR, charge sheet, and the Sessions case in the interest of justice.
Summary
The applicant filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash FIR No. 305/2016 and the charge sheet filed in Sessions Case No. 6/2017 for offences under Sections 376, 406 and 313 of the IPC. Both parties are adults who knew each other, and ten years have elapsed without the trial commencing. The complainant submitted a consent affidavit expressing a desire to move on and asked for the proceedings to be quashed. The applicant also expressed remorse and supported the request. The Court, after considering the consent of the complainant and the long delay, exercised its inherent power under Section 482 to quash the criminal proceedings in the interest of justice, thereby also setting aside the Sessions case. The petition was allowed and disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can quash pending criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC when the complainant consents and there is a substantial delay in prosecution.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 313, 376, 406
Subjects
- quash
- Section 482 CrPC
- consent affidavit
- delayed prosecution
- rape
- criminal breach of trust
- attempt to commit offence
- interest of justice
Judgment
128. APL-802-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 802 OF 2026
Ravi Vinayak Rakshankar .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
....................
Ms. Akshata Barode a/w Mr. Rajesh Poojari i/by Mr. Sugandh K.
Zende, Advocates for Applicant
Mr. Yogesh M. Nakhwa, APP for State
Mr. Kamlesh N. Gujar, Advocate for Respondent No. 2
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 11, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Ms. Barode, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr. Nakhwa,
learned APP for State and Mr. Gujar, learned Advocate for Respondent
No. 2.
2. Present Application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking to quash the C.R. No. 305/2016
registered with Charkop Police Station and charge sheet filed before
Hon'ble Sessions Case No. 6/2017 under Sections 376, 406 and 313 of
IPC against the Applicant herein.
3. Both the parties are adults rather were adults even otherwise at
the time of the incident in question and knew each other well. Even
1 of 3
128. APL-802-26.odt
after 10 years chargesheet having been filed, the trial has not
commenced.
4. The prosecutrix is present in court. She has filed her consent
affidavit dated 17.03.2026 which is appended at page Nos. 101-103
of Petition. She has persuaded the Court to quash the present criminal
proceedings since she has moved on in her life and to end the
ignominy of a pending criminal prosecution.
5. Applicant is also present in Court. He also persuades the Court
to quash the proceedings and expresses remorse at what has
happened.
6. Though at first blush, it may appear that an offense for which
the FIR is registered would be an offense against the Society at large
and would have a societal impact, however, in the facts and
circumstances of the present case which are placed before me, they
persuade me to consider the request made by the parties, and more
particularly, the Complainant.
7. In view of the above, I am inclined to allow the Application so
that the parties can move ahead in life with their respective lives.
Hence, the Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) which
reads thus:-
2 of 3
128. APL-802-26.odt
"a) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate order or
direction quashing the C.R. No. 305/2016 registered with Charkop
Police Station and charge sheet filed before Hon'ble Sessions Case
No. 6/2017 under Sections 376, 406 and 313 of IPC against the
Applicant herein in the interest of justice."
8. It is clarified that as a consequence of allowing present
Application, Sessions Case No. 6 of 2017 which has been filed before
the Additional Sessions Judge, Dindoshi, Mumbai is also quashed and
set aside.
9. Petition stands allowed and disposed of accordingly.
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed by
RAVINDRA RAVINDRA
MOHAN
MOHAN AMBERKAR
AMBERKAR Date: 2026.09.12
17:29:05 +0530
3 of 3
Checking your session…