In a significant development, the Bombay High Court has quashed a First Information Report (FIR) concerning allegations of sexual assault. The court took this step after noting that the involved parties had reached an amicable settlement and the complainant expressed no further desire to pursue the criminal case.
Details of the Case and Allegations
The case originated from an FIR registered at the Arnala police station in November 2025. A woman had alleged that she was induced into a physical relationship based on a promise of marriage. The accused, whom she met through a popular matrimonial website, later reportedly refused to marry her, citing differences in their religious and cultural backgrounds.
The Path to Amicable Resolution
As the legal proceedings advanced, the complainant submitted an affidavit before the High Court. In this document, she stated that the dispute had been resolved amicably between both parties. She clearly expressed that she had no objection to the quashing of the FIR filed against the man.
The court, after careful examination, recorded that the affidavit was filed voluntarily, without any pressure or coercion. Both the accused and the complainant were personally present in court and were formally identified by their respective lawyers.
Court's Reasoning and Legal Precedent
The Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad, delivered the ruling. The Bench acknowledged that courts are typically cautious about quashing criminal proceedings, especially in cases involving serious allegations.
However, the judges emphasized that the High Court's inherent powers can be invoked to secure the ends of justice, depending on the specific facts of each case. The Bench referred to a recent Supreme Court judgment to support its decision.
A key observation was that continuing the prosecution would serve no useful purpose once the complainant herself had decided not to support the case. The court's intervention was thus deemed necessary to prevent a futile exercise of the legal process.
Advocate Nirali Sharma represented the victim in the High Court. The accused was represented by advocates Vijaykumar Mishra and Kunal Patel. The state's interests were represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Mahalaxmi Ganapathy.
