High Court

Legal Reasoning

1APPLN.519.2023.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,BENCH AT AURANGABAD.CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 519 OF 20231.Sheetal w/o Deepak PalhalAge: 32 years Occ. Housewife, R/o Plot No. 6 Sanjay Nagar SamshanMandir road galli No. 1 Aurangabad.(married sister in law of respondent No. 2)2.Soniya w/o Vijay BombleAge: 28 years occu: Housewife R/o Flat No. 32 Avadh Annex A-wing Survey No. 330 Plot No. 1 Samarthnagar Nashik.(married sister in law of respondent No. 2)… ApplicantsVersus1.The State of MaharashtraThrough Begampura Police Station, Aurangabad2.Pooja @ Kalyani W/o Sushil KhillareAge: 26 years Occ: Housewife R/o C/o Pandurang Gore Surewadi Jadhavwadi Aurangabad.… Respondents...Mr. Kachru Ananda Ingle, Advocate for Applicants.Smt. P. R. Bharaswadkar, APP for Respondent No.1 / State.Mr. Ravindra B. Ade, Advocate for Respondent No.2....CORAM :SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.DATE :05th February, 2025. 2APPLN.519.2023.odtO R D E R: (Per Sanjay A. Deshmukh, J.).Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties. 2This is an application under Section 482 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Cr.P.C.) for quashing theproceedings in R.C.C. No.549 of 2023, pending in the Court of thelearned VIth Judicial Magistrate First Class, Aurangabad, arising out ofFIR bearing C.R. No.196 of 2022, dated 11th November, 2022,registered with Begumpura Police Station, District Aurangabad, for theoffence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 read with34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”).3The informant averred in the report that she married withaccused No.1, brother of these applicants, on 10th December, 2013.After the marriage, she was treated well for six months. The mother-in-law of the informant used to search mistakes of the informant,taunting, abusing and teasing her frequently. She used to insult herfrequently. When she told those facts to her husband, he also used toabuse and beat her. The Applicants Sheetal and Soniya used to cometo her house and abuse her alongwith mother-in-law. For some days,she was taken to Mumbai by her husband. When she was at Mumbaion 25th July, 2014, the applicants alongwith mother-in-law came toMumbai and they demanded Rs.5,00,000/- for securing a job for the 3APPLN.519.2023.odthusband of applicant No.2 in the Adivasi Vikas Mahamandal. Theysaid her to make phone call to her father for that amount ofRs.5,00,000/-. She refused to make phone call to her father. Then theapplicants and mother-in-law of informant said to her husband to leavethe informant to her parents’ house, as she is not paying that amount,as she is of no use. She was compelled to make phone call to herfather. That time, the mobile handset was put on speaker mode. Herfather said that, he had already borne the heavy expenses of marriageand he is not having that amount with him. Thereafter, she was againtreated with cruelty. On 27th December, 2014, while informant wascooking food, the smoke of tempering was spread. That time, themother-in-law of the informant went to kitchen and caught hold her earand brought her into hall / living-room. She said why this buffalo hasbeen brought in the house. She abused her and slapped her. Aftershe begotten a son in the year 2015, the husband of the informantdemanded money for purchasing the flat. She brought Rs.4,00,000/-from her father. Her father raised that amount by taking loan andhand-loan. That flat was given to applicant No.1 – Sheetal for residing.It is further averred in the report that on 25th December, 2020, herhusband came from Ratnagiri to Aurangabad. That time, theapplicants and her in-laws instigated her husband and her husbanddemanded Rs.10,00,000/- for purchasing a flat at Mumbai. Theinformant said that how can she demand that amount to her father. 4APPLN.519.2023.odtThat time, her husband beat her and said that he will give divorce toher and perform second marriage. It is further averred in the reportthat on 31st December, 2020, the electricity supply in her house wentoff. Therefore, she went outside the house. That time, her husband,in-laws and both these applicants abused and beat her by kick and fistblows. On 2nd January, 2021, on the instigation of the applicants, herparents-in-law and her husband expelled her out of the house and saidher unless you are bringing Rs.10,00,000/- for purchasing the flat atMumbai, she shall not come in the house. Since then, she is residingwith her parents. Her father made complaint to Women Cell atAurangabad. Her husband did not respond. Compromise could nottake place. Therefore, she lodged the report. 4The learned counsel for the applicants submitted thatapplicant No.1 is residing at Sanjay Nagar Samshan Mandir Road GalliNo.1, Aurangabad and applicant No.2 is residing at SamarthnagarNashik. They are married and residing with their husbands. Theirnames are falsely stated in the report and they are falsely implicated inthe crime. Delay is caused for lodging the report, which is notexplained. He lastly prayed to allow the application. 5The learned APP strongly opposed the application andsubmitted that the names of the applicants are mentioned in the reportwith specific incidents. The applicants have treated the informant with 5APPLN.519.2023.odtcruelty. Therefore, they are liable for causing cruelty to the informant.It is lastly prayed to reject the application.6The learned counsel for respondent No.2 also stronglyopposed the application and submitted that there was illegal demandfor purchasing the flat for two times. The informant was frequentlyharassed as stated by her in the report. The names of the applicantsare mentioned in the report. For securing a job to the husband ofapplicant No.2, an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- was demanded. Thecruelty is thus, coupled with the demand. He lastly prayed to reject theapplication. 7Perused the report. No doubt the report shows the nameof the applicants. However, though there are allegations of demand ofthe money against the applicants, it is not stated as to exactly whenthese applicants came there and they demanded that amount to theinformant. From the report itself, it is crystal clear that the informanthas begotten a son. She was residing with her husband. Theapplicants are residing with their husbands separately at Aurangabadand Nashik respectively. From bare reading of the report, it does notinspire confidence, prima-facie, that the applicants might have treatedthe informant with cruelty by demanding certain amounts frequentlyand abusing her and instigating her husband for treating the informantwith cruelty. If all these aspects are considered together and if the 6APPLN.519.2023.odtapplicants are compelled to face the trial, it would be certainly anabuse of the process of Court. We are, therefore, inclined to allow theapplication. Hence, the following order:-O R D E RI.The application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses(B) and (B-1). II.The application stands disposed of. [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ]nga