Bombay High Court Quashes POCSO Case against Pune’s Businessman, Orders MacBook For Minor As Part Of ₹1.5 Lakh Cost
Bombay High Court Quashes POCSO Case against Pune's Businessman, Orders MacBook For Minor As Part Of ₹1.5 Lakh Cost
Court says complaint arose from misunderstanding; directs device tailored to girl’s academic needs
The Bombay High Court has quashed a case filed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act against a 52-year-old businessman from Pune, after the minor girl and her family informed the court that the complaint had stemmed from a misunderstanding.
While setting aside the FIR, the court imposed a cost of ₹1.5 lakh on the accused and issued a rare direction that part of the amount be used to purchase the latest version of a MacBook or another suitable laptop for the 17-year-old girl.
Justice Ashwin D Bhobe directed the High Court Registry to consult the girl regarding her preference and ensure that the device is aligned with her academic requirements to support her further education. Any remaining amount from the ₹1.5 lakh, after the laptop purchase, is to be transferred to the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund.
Background Of The Case
The case originated from allegations that the girl’s maternal uncle had made inappropriate advances towards her. According to the initial complaint, the alleged incidents occurred while he was driving her to school during her Class 11 examinations and later during a grocery trip in August 2024.
The FIR stated that he had allegedly expressed romantic interest, sent persistent ‘I Love you’ messages, and behaved inappropriately. The girl had initially confided in a school counsellor before informing her grandmother, following which the complaint was registered in Mumbai.
Stand Changes During Proceedings
During the hearing, advocate Shahzad Naqvi, appearing for the accused, submitted that the complaint arose out of a misunderstanding and that the matter had since been resolved within the family.
The girl and her parents, who were present in court, stated that they no longer wished to pursue criminal proceedings and that continuing the case would serve no purpose.
Additional Public Prosecutor P N Dabholkar, representing the state, acknowledged that in light of the victim’s current stand, continuing the trial would not yield any meaningful outcome. However, he argued that costs should be imposed considering the nature of the allegations and proceedings.
The bench agreed and imposed the ₹1.5 lakh cost while allowing the petition to quash the FIR.
The order has drawn attention for its directive to purchase a MacBook or equivalent laptop for the minor, tailored specifically to her academic needs — an uncommon condition attached to the quashing of a criminal case.
