Gujarat High Court
Madhuben Manharbhai Brahmbhatt vs State Of Gujarat on 1 May, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 14971 of 2012
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
MADHUBEN MANHARBHAI BRAHMBHATT & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS TEJAL A VASHI(2704) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR EKANT G AHUJA(5323) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 01/05/2026
JUDGMENT
1. By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "CrPC"), the petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside the FIR being I- CR No.52 of 2012 registered with Maherav Police Station, District Anand and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom. .
2. Brief facts of the case are that Accused No. 1 married Respondent No. 2 on 24.04.2004, and two sons were born out of the wedlock in the years 2005 and 2007. Initially, the matrimonial life was cordial. In March 2007, the brother of Respondent No. 2, Mr. Mihirbhai Hasmukhbhai Barot, sought financial assistance for his business, pursuant to which Accused No. 1 advanced a loan of ₹20 lakhs, repayable within one year. Upon failure to repay, an agreement was executed laying down Page 1 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined the terms of repayment, which was attested by Respondent No. 2, and nine cheques amounting to ₹20 lakhs were issued; however, the same remain unencashed. A subsequent agreement dated 16.05.2011 was also executed revising the repayment terms. The dispute arose when the brother of Respondent No. 2 failed to repay the loan and Accused No. 1 demanded the amount, which allegedly led Respondent No. 2 to initiate multiple proceedings as a counterblast, including proceedings under Section 125 of the CrPC (Criminal Misc. Application No. 4 of 2012), a complaint under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 seeking reliefs under Sections 18, 19, 20, and 22, and thereafter lodging the impugned FIR being C.R. No. I-52 of 2012 with Mehrav Police Station, Anand, for offences under Sections 498A, 323, and 114 of the IPC, with a view to pressurize the accused persons.
3. Learned Advocate Ms. Tejal Vashi for the applicants has submitted that the present applicants have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. It is submitted that earlier, an offence under Section 498A of the IPC was registered, which has already been quashed by this Hon'ble Court. It is further submitted that in Criminal Case No. 336 of 2017, arising out of similar allegations, the accused came to be acquitted. It is contended that the present proceedings have been initiated only with ulterior motives and are nothing but an abuse of the process of law. It is further submitted that Applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are residing separately, and Applicant No. 2, being the uncle- in-law, has no direct nexus or involvement in the alleged offence. Learned Advocate has further submitted that the applicants Page 2 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined cannot be fastened with any liability to pay maintenance, and even otherwise, no case is made out for grant of such relief against them.
3.2 It is further submitted that the complaint under the Domestic Violence Act has been filed belatedly and only after initiation of proceedings under Section 125 of the CrPC and earlier proceedings under Section 498A of the IPC, clearly indicating mala fide intention on the part of the complainant. It is contended that no offence, much less any offence under Sections 18, 19, 20, and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, is made out against the present applicants. It is further submitted that the proceedings under Section 125 of the CrPC were also initiated after a delay of approximately 8.5 months. It is contended that the allegations made in the present complaint are contradictory to the earlier version put forth by the complainant. Learned Advocate has further submitted that the complaint has been filed without any justification and only with a view to exert pressure upon the accused persons.
3.3 It is specifically contended that there exists a financial transaction between Applicant No. 1 and the brother of the complainant, and the present proceedings have been initiated with a view to pressurize the applicants, particularly to prevent Applicant No. 1 from recovering the said amount. It is further submitted that the complainant is attempting to obstruct the execution of the agreement and confession placed on record at Page 3 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined Annexures B and C, and to restrain the applicants from taking legal recourse for recovery of the amount, for which supporting documents, including cheques, are annexed with the said agreement. In view of the above, it is submitted that the present proceedings are frivolous, vexatious, and amount to an abuse of the process of law. It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned proceedings.
4. Learned Advocate Mr. Ekant Ahuja, appearing for Respondent No. 2, has opposed the present application, inter alia, contending that Accused No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 were married in the year 2004, and out of the said wedlock, two sons were born. After the marriage, Respondent No. 2 shifted to Jamnagar, where initially the matrimonial life was cordial; however, subsequently, she was subjected to constant harassment by her husband and mother-in-law over trivial issues. It is submitted that thereafter, the husband shifted to Haryana upon securing better employment, where also Respondent No. 2 was subjected to cruelty and harassment. In the year 2006, Accused No. 1 got an opportunity to work in Abu Dhabi and relocated there. During that period, Respondent No. 2 resided at Vatva village along with her mother-in-law, who allegedly subjected her to mental and physical cruelty. It is further submitted that she resided there for about one year, during which Applicant No. 2 (uncle-in-law) and his son frequently visited and also subjected her to harassment.
Page 4 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined 4.1 It is further contended that thereafter she joined her husband in Abu Dhabi, and in the year 2011, she visited India along with her husband and children. At that time, Applicant No. 2 and Applicant No. 3 allegedly spoke ill about her and instigated her husband against her. Similar acts of instigation are alleged to have continued even while she was in Abu Dhabi through telephonic communication. It is further submitted that she was subjected to abuse in Abu Dhabi and that her husband neglected to maintain her. On account of such circumstances, Respondent No. 2 was constrained to initiate proceedings under Section 125 of the CrPC as well as under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, seeking maintenance, having no other efficacious remedy. It is submitted that an amount of ₹15.45 lakhs is payable towards arrears, which remains unpaid. It is further contended that due to sustained harassment and mental pressure, Respondent No. 2 had even attempted suicide. Learned Advocate has further submitted that the learned Magistrate has only issued notice in the proceedings, and therefore, no case is made out for quashing at this stage. It is, therefore, prayed that the present application be dismissed.
5. Refuting the aforesaid submissions, Learned Advocate Ms. Tejal Vashi for the applicants has submitted that the present proceedings are instituted under Section 482 of the CrPC invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. It is submitted that in the year 2012, a Coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to admit the matter and grant interim relief by staying further proceedings, particularly in view of the averments made in the application and the documents placed on Page 5 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined record, including the agreement and other supporting material. It is, therefore, contended that the question of dismissing the present application at the threshold merely on the ground that notice has been issued by the learned Magistrate does not arise.
6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and upon perusal of the record, it appears that the proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act have been initiated at the instance of Respondent No. 2. The husband is not before this Court. Applicant No. 1 is the mother-in-law, Applicant No. 2 is the uncle-in-law, and Applicant No. 3 is the son of Applicant No. 2. Prima facie, therefore, Applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are distant relatives.
7. Upon perusal of the record, it further appears that earlier attempts at mediation had failed. Proceedings under Section 498A of the IPC were earlier initiated on the same set of allegations against the husband and the present applicants. The said proceedings, being I-CR No. 52 of 2012, came to be quashed by this Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the CrPC. Thereafter, in Criminal Case No. 336 of 2017 arising from similar allegations, the husband also came to be acquitted It further appears that Applicant Nos. 2 and 3, being distant relatives, have been implicated on the same set of facts. The present proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act have thus been initiated on allegations which have already been subject matter of earlier criminal proceedings.1 Page 6 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined
8. On examining the provisions of Section 2(f) of the Domestic Violence Act defining "domestic relationship," it appears that Applicant Nos. 2 and 3 have never resided with Respondent No. 2 in a shared household at any point of time. They do not share any relationship by consanguinity, marriage, or a relationship in the nature of marriage so as to fall within the ambit of "domestic relationship." Hence, prima facie, they cannot be brought within the fold of the said Act.
9. It further appears that at no point of time did the present applicants reside with Respondent No. 2 in a shared household, either jointly or otherwise. There are no specific averments in the complaint satisfying the ingredients of "domestic violence" as defined under Section 3 of the Act. The allegations are general and omnibus in nature, referring to different places such as Jamnagar, Haryana, and Abu Dhabi, without attributing any specific role to the present applicants.
10. There are no specific allegations against the applicants regarding physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal or emotional abuse, or economic abuse. The allegation regarding demand of Rs.5 lakhs attributed to Applicant No. 2 (uncle-in-law) also does not stand substantiated in view of the documents produced at Annexures B and D, namely the agreements executed between the brother of Respondent No. 2 and Applicant No. 2. It further appears that the allegations made in the proceedings under Section 125 of the CrPC, Section 498A of the IPC, and the present proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act are Page 7 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined contradictory. In the earlier criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 323, and 114 of the IPC, upon appreciation of evidence, including the deposition of the complainant and witnesses, the learned Magistrate has recorded that no evidence was adduced regarding demand of dowry, and material improvements were found in the version of the complainant.
11. On the contrary, it has come on record that the brother of Respondent No. 2 had received an amount of Rs.20 lakhs from her husband, and Respondent No. 2 had signed as a witness to the said transaction. It has also been admitted that due to cordial relations between Accused No. 1 and the uncle-in-law, and on account of financial assistance extended by the husband to the uncle-in-law, disputes arose between Respondent No. 2 and her husband. It is also pertinent to note that no complaint was lodged at any point of time at Jamnagar, Panipat, or Abu Dhabi regarding the alleged acts of cruelty. The complainant has thus failed to substantiate the allegations of cruelty.
12. Insofar as Applicant No. 1 (mother-in-law) is concerned, even on the same set of facts, no specific and cogent material is placed on record to establish her involvement in any act of domestic violence. As regards the contention raised by the learned advocate for Respondent No. 2 that since only notice has been issued by the learned Magistrate, this Court ought not to exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC, the same does not merit acceptance. It is required to be noted that the present petition was admitted in the year 2012, and interim Page 8 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined relief was granted in favour of the applicants.
13. By way of the present petition, not only the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act but also the Domestic Incident Report submitted under Section 9(1)(b) read with Section 37(2)(c) of the Act are under challenge. Once such proceedings are initiated, the matter cannot be examined merely on the ground that only notice has been issued. After a lapse of considerable time, this Court cannot be precluded from exercising its inherent jurisdiction on such technical grounds.
14. Insofar as the reliefs under Sections 18, 19, 20, and 22 of the Domestic Violence Act are concerned, the same are primarily directed against the husband, having regard to the nature of the domestic relationship and the reliefs sought. The husband not being before this Court, continuation of the proceedings against the present applicants would amount to an abuse of the process of law.
15. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of the impugned proceedings against the present applicants is not sustainable in law and deserves to be quashed.
16. It appears that applicant is facing charge of Section 498A of IPC. Therefore, as per the allegations made in the complaint, ingredient of Section 498A is made out. In this regard, it would be apposite to refer the decisions of the Apex Court in cases of (i) Page 9 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined Abhishek vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2023INSC779 / (Criminal Appeal No. 1457 of 2015), (ii) Preeti Gupta and another vs. State of Jharkhand, another [(2010) 7 SCC 667], it is observed that "this Court noted that the tendency to implicate the husband and all his immediate relations is also not uncommon in complaints filed under Section 498A IPC. It was observed that the Courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases, as allegations of harassment by husband's close relations, who were living in different cities and never visited or rarely visited the place where the complainant resided, would add an entirely different complexion and such allegations would have to be scrutinised with great care and circumspection.
17. This Court deems it fit to refer to the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of of Ghanshyam Soni v. State Government of NCT of Delhi, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1301, wherein the Court has observed in para 10 as under:
"10. A perusal of the FIR shows that the allegations made by the complainant are that in the year 1999, the Appellant inflicted mental and physical cruelty upon her for bringing insufficient dowry. The Complainant refers to few instances of such atrocities, however the allegations are generic, and rather ambiguous. The allegations against the family members, who have been unfortunately roped in, is that they used to instigate the Appellant husband to harass the Complainant wife, and taunted the Complainant for not bringing enough dowry; however, there is no specific incident of harassment or any evidence to that effect. Similarly, the allegations against the five out of six sisters that they used to Page 10 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined insult the Complainant and demanded dowry articles from her, and upon failure beat her up, but there is not even a cursory mention of the incident. An allegation has also been made against a tailor named Bhagwat that he being a friend of the Appellant instigated him against the Complainant, and was allegedly instrumental in blowing his greed. Such allegations are merely accusatory and contentious in nature, and do not elaborate a concrete picture of what may have transpired. For this reason alone, and that the evidence on record is clearly inconsistent with the accusations, the version of the Complainant seems implausible and unreliable. The following observation in K Subba Rao v. State of Telangand Represented by its Secretary, Department of Home and Ors., reported in 2018 14 SCC 12, fits perfectly to the present scenario:
"6. The Courts should be careful in proceeding against the distant relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. The relatives of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime are made out."
18. Keeping in mind the aforesaid legal position as well as the same set of fact under Section 498(A) proceedings accused including husband are acquitted by the learned JMFC after appreciation of evidence and herein husband is not before this Court.
19. Reference is required to be made in case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, the Apex Court has set out the categories of cases in which the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised and held in para 102 as under:
"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Art. 226 or the Page 11 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised :
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
20. Even in the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Achin Gupta v. State of Haryana, 2024 INSC 369, the same view was observed. It is a clear case of over- implication. The allegation against the applicants is that they have instigated the complainant's husband. Needless to say, the husband is not before this Court, as discussed above. Prima facie, it appears that with ulterior motives, the present applicants are being falsely dragged into litigation. This is a clear case of over-implication, and no purpose would be served by proceeding further with the litigation and the applicants herein Page 12 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14971/2012 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/05/2026 undefined have been protected since 02.11.2012. In view of the above, it appears that with a view to exerting pressure on the petitioners to settle the dispute with the husband, the present petitioners are being dragged into litigation, thereby abusing the process of law. Hence, the present impugned complaint is required to be quashed and set aside because the allegations are trivial in nature, and there has been no progress since 2012.
21. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned complaint being I-CR No.52 of 2012 registered with Maherav Police Station, District Anand as well as all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicants herein. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ALI Page 13 of 13 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Mon May 04 2026 Downloaded on : Tue May 05 02:43:30 IST 2026