High Court

Legal Reasoning

cran1664.23-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABADCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1664 OF 20231.Nikhil s/o Narayan PathareAge 36 years, Occ. LabourR/o. Mohini Nagar, Kedgaon,Tal. Karjat, District Ahmednagar (husband) 2.Bebi w/o Narayan PathareAge 53 years, Occ. HouseholdR/o. As above (mother in law)3.Vishal s/o Narayan PathareAge 37 years, Occ. ServiceR/o. As above(brother in law) ...Applicants Versus 1.The State of MaharashtraIncharge Investigating Officer,Karjat Police Station, KarjatTq. Karjat, District Ahmednagar2.Bhagyashri w/o Nikhil PathareAge 32 years, Occ. HouseholdR/o. C/o. Bapusaheb Thakaji HoleAt Holewadi, Post. ChilwadiTq. Karjat, District Ahmednagar...Respondents …..Mr. S.R. Andhale, Advocate for the applicantsMr. A.D. Wange, A.P.P. for the respondent No.1Mr. A.S. More, Advocate for respondent No.2. ….. CORAM:SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.DATED:25th JULY, 2025 cran1664.23-2- 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 thecriminal proceeding bearing R.C.C. No. 301 of 2022 pending beforethe Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Karjat, District Ahmednagararising out of F.I.R. No. 788 of 2022 registered with Karjat policestation, district Ahmednagar for the offences punishable underSections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 r.w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (for short “the I.P.C.”) 3.The informant averred in the report that applicant No.1 isher husband, applicant No.2 is mother-in-law and applicant No.3 isher brother-in-law.4.The informant averred in the report that she married withapplicant No.1 on 4.7.2014. After marriage, she begot a son in theyear 2015 and a daughter in the year 2019. Till then, she wastreated well. But thereafter, the applicants started to demandRs.50,000/- i.e. the balance amount of dowry fixed at Rs.1,00,000/-,at the time of marriage. The applicants continuously started to cran1664.23-3- harass her. The informant tried to convince them that her parents arenot in a position to pay the said amount because of their poorfinancial condition and therefore, she cannot fetch the amount andher harassment was continued. The informant further averred thatshe came to know that her husband was having illicit relations with agirl. The husband used to hate her on that count. Because offinancial crisis in the house, she joined a job with a Maruti ShowRoom in M.I.D.C. Ahmednagar. She used to complete all householdchores in the morning and attend the job. However, her harassmentwas continued.5.The informant further averred that on 13.10.2022, when shecame back from her job in the evening, the applicants beaten her withfist and kick blows for an amount of Rs.50,000/-. The applicantshurled abuses by using filthy language. She was also starved.Therefore, alongwith her children, she went to her parents house atHolewadi, Chilwadi, Tq. Karjat, District Ahmednagar. There, shecame to know that her husband lodged a missing report against her.She accordingly, went to the police station to close that missingreport. Meanwhile, the applicants went to the house of her sister viz.Namita Vilas Jadhav, R/o. Baramati, District Pune. Since the sister ofthe informant was not at the house, the applicants abused herdaughter by alleging that they concealed the informant. They cran1664.23-4- threatened her. Thereafter, the applicants went to another sister ofthe informant viz. Shobha Rupesh Borate and questioned her whereis her sister i.e. the informant. She stated that she went to Nagar.They hurled abuses in filthy language and threatened her. Theinformant thereafter made a complaint to Women GrievanceRedressal Cell at Karjat. The compromise could not be effected.Therefore, the report was lodged against the applicants.6.Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that vagueand baseless allegations are made against the applicants, withoutquoting the specific role of each of the applicants. The date and timeof allegation of demand of amount of Rs.50,000/- towards theremaining dowry is also not specifically mentioned in the report. Allallegations are vague and general in nature. There is a delay inlodging the report. From the charge sheet, it appears that all thewitnesses whose statements are recorded are from the parental sideof the informant. The said statements of the witnesses cannot provethat the harassment and cruelty has been caused to the informant.He further submits that the applicants have been implicated in thecrime without any basis. Therefore, he prayed to quash the report aswell as the consequential proceedings. 7.Learned A.P.P. for respondent No.1 State and learned cran1664.23-5- advocate for respondent No.2 strongly opposed the application bysubmitting that the applicants have treated the informant with cruelty,physically as well as mentally. There was a demand of Rs.50,000/-on the part of all applicants towards the remaining dowry and onaccount of non fulfillment of the said demand, the applicants havetreated the informant with cruelty and have abused, starved andbeaten her. The applicants have caused harassment to the informantmentally as well as physically. The names of the applicants arementioned in the report with specific roles attributed to each of theapplicants. They cannot be exonerated from the criminal liabilityunder Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 r.w. 34 of the I.P.C. It islastly prayed to reject the application. 8.It would be relevant to refer to and rely upon the judgmentof the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Disha Kapoor vs.State of Uttar Pradesh and others, reported in 2025 SCC OnLineSC 1070, wherein it is held that the Courts to be doubly cautious andextremely careful in dealing with such complaints, especially sincethe ultimate object of justice is to find out the truth and not only topunish the guilty but also to protect the innocent.9.We have perused the charge sheet, particularly the report andthe statements of the witnesses. The report in the present case is cran1664.23-6- lodged on 23.11.2022. The injury certificate in respect of allegedbeating does not show any injury sustained to the informant. Thestatements of witnesses are nothing but a copy paste material. Inthe statements of witnesses, particularly those of Suman, arerepetitive and lack of particularity, containing vague and generalallegations are made against the applicants. The story of demand ofRs.50,000/- of remaining amount of dowry made after the birth of thedaughter is not found probable. It is not clarified as to how applicantNo.3 brother-in-law and applicant No.2 mother-in-law ill-treated theinformant after a long period of her marriage, which has beenperformed on 04.07.2014. The witnesses have stated same facts asstated by the informant in her report. The report is not lodgedimmediately after the alleged incident of cruelty. The vague andgeneral allegations of cruelty are made against the applicants withouthaving any supportive material. Therefore, allegations of cruelty areimprobable and hence not sufficient to establish the essentialingredients of Section 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 r.w. 34 of the I.P.C.Therefore, on such general and vague allegations and as per law laiddown by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Disha Kapoor vs.State of Uttar Pradesh and others (supra), compelling theapplicants to face the trial, would be an abuse of the process of thecourt. The case is made out for exercise of our extraordinary powersunder section 482 of the Cr.P.C. We are therefore, inclined to allow cran1664.23-7- the application, in the interest of justice to prevent the abuse of theprocess of the Court. Hence, the following order:-O R D E RI.The application stands allowed. II.The R.C.C. No. 301 of 2022 pending before the JudicialMagistrate, First Class, Karjat, District Ahmednagar arising outof F.I.R. No. 788 of 2022 registered with Karjat police station,district Ahmednagar for the offences punishable underSections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r.w. 34 of I.P.C. stand quashedand set aside as against the present applicants. (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) (SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.)rlj/