Bombay High Court Quashes FIR Against Retired Professor Who Sent Objectionable Message to Former Colleague, Noting It Was “Unintentionally Sent” Due to Mental Illness
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, has quashed an FIR and related proceedings registered under Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, following a joint submission from the informant and the petitioner acknowledging the petitioner’s mental illness. The Division Bench comprising Justice Sarang V. Kotwal and Justice S.M. Modak recorded that, “no purpose will be served in continuing with the prosecution. It would be in the interest of justice to quash the proceedings.”
The petition before the High Court sought the quashing of a First Information Report registered on 13 December 2022 at Malabar Hill Police Station and the ensuing proceedings before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, 40th Court, Girgaum, Mumbai. The matter was resolved on 19 March 2025 based on mutual consent and medical findings placed on record.
The Bench allowed the petition in part, specifically quashing C.R. No. 380 of 2022 and the consequential case C.C. No. 331/PW/2023. No penalties or further directions were issued apart from the termination of the criminal proceedings.
The dispute originated from a complaint lodged by the respondent, a woman employed in a service role, who had formerly taught at a reputed college in South Mumbai alongside the petitioner. After securing alternate employment, the informant left the college. The petitioner also subsequently retired.
On 12 December 2022, the respondent received a WhatsApp message from the petitioner, which she described as obscene and objectionable. Shocked by the contents of the message, she approached the police and lodged a complaint. The FIR was registered the following day under Section 354-D of the IPC, which pertains to stalking, and Section 67 of the IT (Amendment) Act, 2008, which addresses the electronic transmission of obscene material.
During the proceedings before the High Court, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was suffering from a mental illness and placed on record a medical report issued by a psychologist. The report was accepted by the Court. The informant, identified as respondent no.1, was present in Court and submitted an affidavit titled “Affidavit of Consent,” expressing her agreement to the quashing of the proceedings.
The affidavit stated that the respondent was unaware of the petitioner’s medical condition at the time of filing the complaint. It was recorded by the Court that the petitioner was diagnosed with a mental disease identified as FTLD (Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration), which impaired his judgment and social awareness. The Court noted that, “because of mental impairment of his faculties, the Petitioner was unable to judge the right social behaviour and in that state, unintentionally sent the offending Whats-App message to the Respondent No.1.”
The respondent, after learning of the diagnosis, chose to withdraw her allegations. Her affidavit indicated that she no longer sought to pursue criminal proceedings, recognising the petitioner’s mental health issues as the cause of the incident. The Court recorded her submission: “she has understood the mental illness from which the Petitioner is suffering. She stated before the Court, that she has ‘No objection’ for quashing of the proceedings.”
The State of Maharashtra, represented by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, was also present. The Court noted that the respondent had reaffirmed her consent in open court and was identified by her legal representative.
The Court examined the allegations and evidence before it and considered the affidavit and medical report presented. It concluded that the prosecution, under the given circumstances, would not serve the interest of justice. The Bench observed: “As can be seen from the above discussion, it is a fact accepted by the Respondent No.1 that the message was sent unintentionally when the Petitioner was not in a fit state of mind. In this background, the Respondent No.1 has given her consent to quash the proceedings.”
In view of the mutual consent and absence of objection from the informant, as well as the verified mental health condition of the petitioner, the Court exercised its jurisdiction to terminate the proceedings.
The operative portion of the order stated: “The C.R. No.380 of 2022 registered with Malabar Hill Police Station and the consequent proceedings i.e. C.C. No.331/PW/2023 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate First Class, 40th Court, Girgaum, Mumbai are quashed and set aside.”
The Court concluded the matter by disposing of both the main writ petition and the companion interim application without issuing further directions.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanjay Bhatia, Advocate
For the Respondents: Ms. Neha Kamble, Advocate, Mr. B.V. Holambe – Patil, APP
Case Title: Kailash Hanumandas Chandak through his next kin and brother Bhanwarlal Hanumandas Chandak and friend vs. XXXX and The State of Maharashtra
Neutral Citation: 2025:BHC-AS:13343-DB
Case Number: Writ Petition No.1419 of 2025 with Interim Application No.1054 of 2025
Bench: Justice Sarang V. Kotwal and Justice S.M. Modak
[Read/Download order]
