High Court

Legal Reasoning

cran2280.23-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABADCRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2280 OF 20231.Harshal S/o Baban Bhale, Age: 26 yrs, Occu: Service, R/o: Madhura Nagar, Harangul (Bk.) Tq. & Dist. Latur.(application is withdrawn againstthis applicant) 2. Shantanu S/o Baban Bhale, Age: 22 yrs, Occu: Education, R/o.Madhura Nagar. Harangul (Bk.). Tq. & Dist. Latur3. Suman W/o Baban Bhale, Age: 45 yrs, Occu: Н.Н., R/o. Madhura Nagar, Harangul (Bk.), Tq. & Dist. Latur4. Baban S/o Irappa Bhale, Age: 52 yrs, Occu: Service, R/o.Madhura Nagar, Harangul (Bk.), Tq. & Dist. Latur...Applicants Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through MIDC Police Station Latur. Dist. Latur. 2. Rutuja w/o Harshal Bhale Age: 20 Years, Occu: Nil, R/o: Harangul (Bk) Tq & Dist Latur, At present residing at Bhodhe Nagar, Near Boudha Garden Latur. ...Respondents …..Mr. Ajinkya Reddy, advocate for the applicants Mr. A.D. Wange, A.P.P. for respondent No.1Mr. Fayaz K.Patel, advocate for respondent No.2….. cran2280.23-2- CORAM:SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.DATED:19th MARCH, 2025 O R D E R (PER SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) :- 1.Heard. 2.The applicants are seeking quashing of the F.I.R. vide C.R.No.136 of 2023, registered with M.I.D.C. Latur police station, Latur forthe offenes punishable under sections 498-A, 377, 354, 323, 504 r.w.34 of I.P.C. and the consequential criminal case bearing R.C.C. No.1675 of 2023 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate FirstClass, Latur, District Latur. 3.The informant averred in the report that she married withthe son of applicant Nos. 3 and 4 on 27.5.2022. The applicant No.2 isanother son of the applicant Nos. 3 and 4. Husband of the informantwas serving in ICICI bank, Udaya nagar, Bhoom, DistrictOsmanabad as a cashier. She was residing at Harangul with herhusband since her marriage alongwith the applicants. After 5 days ofthe marriage, the informant went to her parents house alongwith hermaternal uncle Shubham Kamble. After four days she returned toHarangul with her brother in law Shantanu. On next day, the husbandof the informant made allegations that his gold ring is missing from cran2280.23-3- the house since the visit of her relatives, indirectly, alleging a theftagainst brother of the informant. Her husband asked the informant toeither bring the gold ring or money. He abused her. At that time, allthe applicants abused her. On the next day, the parents of theinformant came there. They convinced the applicants and herhusband. To prevent further harassment of the informant, the fatherof the informant gave an amount of Rs.27,000/- as compensation ofgold ring. It was paid by her father. Then after two days, husband ofthe informant went on duty at Bhoom. Applicant No.2 was touchingthe infomrant’s body with sexual intention. He was looking towardsher with a sexual intention. He touched her breast. The in-laws weredemanding money for purchasing a vehicle. She could not pay thattherefore, they were taunting her and because of that she hadsuffered by mental cruelty. The informant further averred that herhusband used to come to the house on every Saturday and Sunday.At that time, he used to say to her to wear the veil of Saree (Padar)properly and clean the house properly. On such simple reasons heused to abuse and beat her. Her husband committed unnaturalintercourse with her against her will. He beaten the informant whenshe opposed for it. When the informant told that fact to her in laws,they said her not to stay there. The informant told that fact to herfather. He tried to convince the applicants and the husband of theinformant. cran2280.23-4- 4.The informant further averred that in the month ofSeptember, 2022, her husband beaten her by fist and kick blows. Theinformant was admitted in the Hospital for treatment for three days.Then after some days, the informant went to Golai alongwith herhusband, at that time, also her husband beaten her by doubting herand asking that as to why she is looking here and there?5.It is also averred by the informnt that after some days, theapplicant No.2, brother in law of the informant, touched her body withbad and sexual intention. Therefore, the informant told that fact toher mother in law. She also told that fact to her husband but thehusband did not pay any heed to her. The informant’s in-laws statedthat what is a big deal even if applicant No.2, brother in law- touchesher body. At that time, all the applicants abused her. She alongwithher father, went to her parents house on 9.12.2022. On 21.02.2023she had informed about it her relatives, particularly mother andmaternal Aunt Shilpa Shinde that her husband had committedunnatural sexual intercourse. Thus, all the applicants treated her withcruelty. Thereafter, she lodged a report against the applicants thatthe applicants and her husband have treated her with cruelty. Theapplicant No.2 outraged her modesty and all the applicantsdemanded money for purchasing the vehicle and they were taunting cran2280.23-5- her. Therefore, report is lodged against the applicants on 25.2.2023. 6.Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that theapplicants are falsely implicated in the crime by making false andomnibus allegations against them. The applicants never ill-treated theinformant. They have not demanded any amount to informant and herparents. There is no evidence of medical treatment as alleged by theinformant in her report about beating her. The essential ingredients ofsections 498-A, 354, 323, 504, 506 r.w. 34 of I.P.C. are notestablishing against any of the applicants. Learned advocatetherefore, lastly submitted that if the applicants are compelled to facethe trial on such material, it would certainly be an abuse of process ofthe court, as there is no reliable evidence against the applicants.7.Learned A.P.P. for respondent No.1 State strongly opposedthe application by submitting that the applicants have treated theinformant with cruelty, physically as well as mentally. Applicant No.2brother-in-law of the informant had touched to her body with badintention. Even the in-laws of the informant have not givenunderstanding to him on the contrary they have supported him. Thereare specific allegations against the applicants which establishescruelty against them. The specific roles by mentioning their namesare attributed to each of the applicants. They cannot be exonerated cran2280.23-6- from the criminal liability under Sections 498-A, 354, 323, 504, 506r.w. 34 of I.P.C. It is lastly prayed to reject the application. 8.Learned advocate for respondent No.2-informant submittedthat the names of the applicants are mentioned in the report withspecific role attributed to them in respect of abuses and cruelty to theinformant. The applicants on trifling and simple reason used to abuseand beat the informant. Her husband committed unnaturalintercourse with her. He beaten the informant when she opposed forit. When the informant told that fact to her in laws, they tried toconvince the applicants and her husband but it went in vain and theharassment was continued. The applicants have treated theinformant with cruelty, which constitute the offences referred in theF.I.R. Learned advocate lastly prayed to reject the application. 9.It would be relevant to refer to the judgment of the Hon’bleSupreme 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 to cran2280.23-7- the 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 to lookinto the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone forthe purpose of ascertaining whether the necessaryingredients to constitute the alleged offence aredisclosed or not. In frivolous or vexatious proceedings,the Court owes a duty to look into many other attendingcircumstances emerging from record of the case overand above the averments and, if need be, with due careand circumspection try to read in between the lines. TheCourt while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482of the CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution need notrestrict itself only to the stage of a case but isempowered to take into account the overallcircumstances leading to the initiation/registration of thecase as well as materials collected in the course ofinvestigation…..” 10.We have perused the report and the charge sheet. Thestatements of witnesses are on record. They have stated the samefact which the informant has stated in her report. To support theallegations of causing of alleged cruelty on the part of the applicants,there is no documentary evidence of medical treatment given to theinformant when she was admitted in the hospital after beating by herhusband. The role of the applicants is not specifically stated by theinformant in her report as to when they individually or collectivelytreated her with cruelty. There is no specific incident with date as to cran2280.23-8- when the applicant No.2 outraged her modesty and all the applicantsbeaten her on account of non fulfillment of demand of moneyrequired for purchase of the vehicle. The vague and omnibusallegations are made against the applicants. There is no sufficientevidence to proceed further with the case against the applicants. Ifthe applicants are compelled to face the trial on such general,omnibus and vague allegations, it would certainly be an abuse ofprocess of the court. Therefore, it is necessary to invoke inherentpowers under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing of the reportand the criminal case, in the interest of justice to prevent abuse ofprocess of Court. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the application.Hence, we pass the following order:- O R D E RI.Criminal application stands allowed.II.F.I.R. vide C.R. No.136 of 2023, registered with M.I.D.C.Latur police station, Latur for the offenes punishable undersections 498-A, 377, 354, 323, 504 r.w. 34 of I.P.C. and theconsequential criminal case bearing R.C.C. No. 1675 of2023 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate FirstClass, Latur, District Latur, are quashed against thepresent applicants i.e. applicant Nos. 2 to 4. (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) (SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.)rlj/