High Court
Legal Reasoning
cran1672.23-9- 12.We have perused the charge sheet, particularly the report andthe statements of witnesses. Prima facie, it appears that mainallegations of demand of Rs.20,00,000/- are not made against thepresent applicants. It further appears that the witnesses have statedsimilar facts as stated by the informant in her report. Admittedly, theapplicants are residing at Garkheda, Aurangabad. As to when theywent to the house of the informant and specifically harassed her bydemanding of Rs.20,00,000/- for starting new business and purchaseof house is not stated in the report or the statements of witnesses.The vague and general allegations of cruelty are made against theapplicants. Considering all these aspects, charge sheet does notestablish essential ingredients of cruelty as defined under Section498-A, 323, 504, 506 r.w. 34 of the I.P.C. Therefore, on such vagueand general allegations, compelling the applicants to face the trial,would be an abuse of process of the court. The case is made out forexercise of our discretionary powers under section 482 of the Cr.P.C.We are therefore, inclined to allow the application, in the interest ofjustice to prevent the abuse of process of the Court. Hence, thefollowing order:-O R D E R I.The application stands allowed. II.The F.I.R. vide C.R. No. 107 of 2023 registered with cran1672.23-10- Ambajogai police Station, Ambajogai, District Beed for theoffences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r.w.34 of the I.P.C. and the consequential criminal case bearingR.C.C. No. 144 of 2023 pending before the learned JudicialMagistrate, First Class, Ambajogai, district Beed standquashed and set aside to the extent of present applicants. (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) (SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.)rlj/
Arguments
cran1672.23-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABADCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1672 OF 20231.Chandraprabha w/o Shrikant ShelkeAge 48 years, Occ. Household /Director, R/o. B-8, Disha Sankul,Jawahar Nagar, Garkheda Parisar,Near Reliance Mark, GarkhedaAurangabad, District Aurangabad(sister in law of informant) 2.Shrikant s/o Chandrkant Shelke Age 50 years, Occ. Business, R/o. B-8, Disha Sankul,Jawahar Nagar, Garkheda Parisar,Near Reliance Mark, GarkhedaAurangabad, District Aurangabad(husband of sister in law of informant) ...Applicants Versus 1.The State of Maharashtra Through the police Station, Officer,Ambajogai City police Station,Ambajogai, District Beed 2.Jyoti w/o Pradip Tele,Age 35 years, Occ. Household R/o. Hingangaon, Tal. Kallam, District Osmanabad, at present Prashantnagar,Ambajogai, Tq. Ambajogai,District Beed ...Respondents…..Mr. A.R. Devkate, Advocate for the applicantsMr. S.A. Gaikwad, A.P.P. for the respondent No.1Ms. Neha Udavant h/f Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate for respondentNo.2. ….. cran1672.23-2- CORAM:SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.DATED:25th JUNE, 2025 O R D E R (PER SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) :- 1.Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. 2.This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Code ofCriminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “the Cr.P.C.”) for quashing ofF.I.R. vide C.R. No. 107 of 2023 registered with Ambajogai policeStation, Ambajogai, District Beed for the offences punishable underSections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r.w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (for short “the I.P.C.”) and the consequential criminal casebearing R.C.C. No. 144 of 2023 pending before the learned JudicialMagistrate, First Class, Ambajogai, district Beed.3.The informant averred in the report that she married withPradip Sahebrao Tele on 16.6.2014, the brother of applicant No.1.The applicant No.2 is husband of applicant No.1. At the time ofmarriage, her father had given a dowry of Rs.5,51,000, thirty-onetolas of gold ornaments and household articles, along with othercustomary gifts and hospitality. After the marriage, she was taken toher matrimonial home at Hingangaon. Thereafter, her husband tookher to Pune. In the month of July 2014, on account of her wearing adress, her husband abused her, tore her clothes, and threatened her cran1672.23-3- to only wear a saree and live according to his terms, if she wished tostay in Pune. The applicants and other accused were coming in thehouse of her husband at Pune and they were taunting and abusingfor trivial reasons. They were compelling her to do all householdchores throughout the day. They also took away all her ornamentsand persistently pressured her to demand Rs.20,00,000 from herparents for starting a business and purchasing a house inAurangabad. They threatened that if the demand was not fulfilled,they would perform the second marriage of her husband Pradip. Theinformant further averred that her husband was saying to her that sheshould emotionally influence his maternal aunt and uncle and ensurethat their entire property is transferred in his name, as they have nochild. On her refusal, she was repeatedly abused and assaultedphysically.4.The informant further averred in the report that in the month ofFebruary 2015, due to pregnancy, she was sent to her maternalhome at Ambajogai for delivery. She begotten a male child, Yash on10.4.2015. In November 2015, when she returned to Hingangaonwith the child, her husband abandoned her there and left for Pune.Her in-laws began harassing her by keeping her on starvation.Despite this, she continued to bear the ill-treatment and stayed withthem. The applicant No.1 Chandraprabha served her tea by mixing cran1672.23-4- unknown powder in it. Upon noticing the powder settled at the floor,she confronted that to the applicants, but they intimidated her andthreatened not to disclose it to anyone.5.The informant further averred that when her mother wassuffering from cancer, she was proceeding to Ambajogai, at that time,the applicants and other accused abused her. At that time she waspregnant. In the month March, 2020, her husband beaten hermercilessly. Her dish of meal was thrown on her person. She wasbearing such bad treatment and cruelty on the part of the applicantsand other accused persons. On 4.11.2020 she delivered a baby girlviz. Vedangi, on 04/11/2020. After about two and a half months, shereturned to Aurangabad. Her son was not admitted to school, and herhusband demanded that her father should bear the school fees. On28/02/2021, her husband dropped her at Hingangaon and hereturned to Aurangabad. There, her in laws were teasing her on oneand the same count. 6.The informant further averred that she later returned toAurangabad in August 2021, where her husband assaulted her againover an issue of milk. Due to postnatal weakness and recurringinfections, she fell ill frequently, but her husband never took her tothe hospital. Instead, he told her that he was waiting for her death. cran1672.23-5- Her husband then called his parents and applicant no.1 toAurangabad, where they all tortured her and did not allow her to gooutside or talk on the phone. Despite all this, she remained silent andcontinued to suffer the abuse.7.The informant further averred that, on 16/09/2021, her elderbrother’s marriage took place in Ambajogai, but she was not allowedto attend it. The informant stated that due to the continuousharassment and financial demands, she had informed her father,brother, uncle and maternal uncle. Her maternal relatives evenvisited her in-laws to persuade them, explaining their financialincapacity and requesting them to treat her properly. However, her in-laws persistently abused, insulted, and assaulted her. She refrainedfrom lodging any complaint in the past as she did not want hermarriage to break and desired to maintain the relationship. But theapplicants and other accused persons acted in connivance and on24/10/2021, assaulted her with fists and slaps, subjected her toverbal abuse, physical torture and starvation, and drove her out ofthe matrimonial house as she failed to bring Rs.20,00,000 from herparents for business purposes. Since then, she had been residingwith her children at her maternal home in Ambajogai. Despitefrequent requests of the informant’s father, brother, uncle, andmaternal uncle to take her back, threats were issued that if she was cran1672.23-6- brought back, they would kill her. 8.The informant further averred that, on 14/03/2023, theaforesaid persons again came to her parental house in Ambajogai,reiterated the monetary demand, and threatened that if the moneywas not paid, they would proceed with arranging a second marriagefor her husband. Therefore, she lodged the report on 1.3.2023against the applicants and other accused persons.9.Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that general andbaseless allegations are made against these applicants. Theapplicants are residing at Aurangabad whereas the informant wasresiding at Hingangaon, in Osmanabad district. It is not specificallystated as to when these applicants went to the matrimonial home ofthe informant and demanded the amount of Rs.20,00,000/-.Although the names of the applicants are mentioned in the F.I.R., theallegations against them are made without quoting their specific role.Further, the date and time of alleged demand of Rs.20,00,000/- forstarting a new business and purchase of house is not specificallymentioned in the report. The report is not lodged immediately of thealleged incident of abusing and beating and thus there is a delay inlodging the report. From the charge sheet, it appears that all thewitnesses whose statements are recorded, are from the parental side cran1672.23-7- of the informant. The said statements of the witnesses cannot provethat the harassment and cruelty has been caused to the informant.The applicants are close relatives of the husband of the informantand only in order to implicate the entire family and the relatives, thereport has been lodged falsely. He further submits that the applicantshave been implicated in the crime without any basis. Therefore, heprayed to quash the report as well as the consequential proceedings.10.Learned A.P.P. for respondent No.1 State and learnedadvocate for respondent No.2 strongly opposed the application bysubmitting that the applicants used to visit the matrimonial house ofthe informant and treated the informant with cruelty. There was aconsistent demand of amount of Rs.20,00,000/- from the parents ofinformant for starting new business and for purchase of house and onaccount of non fulfillment of the said demand, the applicants havetreated the informant with cruelty. The applicants and other accusedpersons have caused harassment to the informant mentally as wellas physically. The names of the applicants are specifically mentionedin the report. The specific roles are attributed to each of theapplicants by mentioning their names. They cannot be exoneratedfrom the criminal liability. 11.It would be relevant to refer to the judgment of the Hon’ble cran1672.23-8- Supreme court in the case of Kim Wansoo Vs. State of UttarPradesh & Ors., reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 17 , in which theHon’ble Supreme Court, in paras 9 and 11 of the judgment, has heldas under :“9.In State of A.P. v. Golconda Linga Swamy, this Courtagain held that where an FIR did not disclose the commissionof an offence without anything being added or subtracted fromthe recitals thereof, the said FIR could be quashed.11.In the contextual situation, it is also relevant to refer tothe decision of this Court in Mohammad Wajid and Anotherv. State of U.P. and Anr., whereunder this Court, in so far asit is relevant, held thus :-“34…….. it will not be just enough for the Court tolook into the averments made in the FIR/complaintalone for the purpose of ascertaining whether thenecessary ingredients to constitute the allegedoffence are disclosed or not. In frivolous or vexatiousproceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into manyother attending circumstances emerging from recordof the case over and above the averments and, ifneed be, with due care and circumspection try toread in between the lines. The Court while exercisingits jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC orArticle 226 of the Constitution need not restrict itselfonly to the stage of a case but is empowered to takeinto account the overall circumstances leading to theinitiation/registration of the case as well as materialscollected in the course of investigation…..”