Bombay High Court
Vishant Samadhan Sonone And ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 24 February, 2021
Bench: Z.A. Haq, Amit B. Borkar
Judgment 1 apl411.15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 411 OF 2015
1. Vishant Samadhan Sonone,
Aged 31 Occupation : Service,
Resident of Flat No.404, Q Building
Madhuwant, Nanded City,
Sinhagad Road, Pune - 411 041.
2. Smt. Shashikala Samadhan Sonone,
aged 61 Occupation : Household,
Resident of Flat No.404, Q Building
Madhuwant, Nanded City,
Sinhagad Road, Pune - 411 041.
3. Sau. Varsha Arun Chavhan,
aged 35 years, Occupation: Household,
Resident of Suvarna Nagar,
Behind Bus Stand, Buldana,
Tahsil and District : Buldana.
.... APPLICANTS.
// VERSUS //
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through its Police Station
Officer, Police Station, Khamgaon,
Tahsil : Khamgaon, Dist. Buldana.
2. Sau. Neha Vishant Sonone,
aged 22 years, Occ. Household,
Resident of C/o. Shri Deepak
Kashiram Tidke, BSNL Staff
Quarters, Near Zunzunwala
Petrol Pump, Nandura Road,
Khamgaon, Tahsil : Khamgaon,
District: Buldana.
.... NON-APPLICANTS.
::: Uploaded on - 02/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 29/08/2021 18:08:53 :::
Judgment 2 apl411.15.odt
___________________________________________________________________
Shri T.U.Tathod, Advocate for Applicants.
Shri S.P. Deshpande, A.P.P. for Non-applicant No.1.
None for Non-applicant No.2.
___________________________________________________________________
CORAM : Z.A.HAQ AND AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED : FEBRUARY 24, 2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : Amit B. Borkar, J.)
1. Heard learned Advocate for the applicants and the learned A.P.P.
for the non-applicant No.1.
None appeared for the non-applicant No.2 on 18/02/2021, the
matter was therefore, adjourned for today. Today also none appeared for the
non-applicant No.2, therefore, we are deciding the matter on merits.
2. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure the applicants have challenged the registration of the First
Information Report No.67 of 2015, dated 04/05/2015 for the offence
punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. The First Information Report came to be registered against the
applicants with the accusations that the marriage between applicant No.1
and the non-applicant No.2 was performed on 11/05/2014. It is alleged that
Judgment 3 apl411.15.odt
thereafter the applicants physically and mentally harassed the non-applicant
No.2. It is further alleged that the applicant No.2 raised hands on the non-
applicant No.2 and attempted to beat her. It is alleged that the harassment
caused to the non-applicant No.2 was due to non-payment of the amount of
dowry of Rs.5,00,000/-. It is alleged that the non-applicant No.2 has been
residing with her father and mother from 03/08/2014. The applicant has
filed complaint with the non-applicant No.1 on 05/01/2015 and the First
Information Report came to be registered against the applicant on
04/05/2015.
4. The applicants have challenged registration of the First
Information Report by filing present application. This Court on 2 nd July 2015
issued notice to the non-applicants and on 7 th October 2015 issued Rule and
granted interim relief granting stay to the investigation in relation to First
Information Report No.67 of 2015.
5. The non-applicant No.1 has filed reply and it is stated that it is
the contention of the non-applicant No.2 that she was mentally and
physically harassed by the applicants for non-payment of Rs.5,00,000/-
towards dowry. It is further stated that the Investigating Officer has recorded
statements of relatives of the non-applicant No.2.
Judgment 4 apl411.15.odt
6. The non-applicant No.2 has also filed reply and it is stated that
the allegation in the present application that the marriage of the non-
applicant No.2 took place with one Deepak Gaikwad is incorrect and the
documents annexed to the present application to prove said marriage are
forged and fabricated documents. It is stated that the marriage with the
applicant No.1 is not second marriage. It is further stated that the pendency
of the criminal complaint filed by the applicant on 24 th April 2015 before the
Judicial Magistrate First Class Court, Pune does not affect the present
proceedings and therefore, it was prayed that the application deserves to be
dismissed.
7. We have carefully considered the allegations in the First
Information Report and we find that the allegations against each of the
applicant is vague in nature. Though the non-applicant No.2 has mentioned
the dates when the alleged incident took place, but after considering the
allegations in the First Information Report, we find that even if the
allegations are assumed to be correct, the ingredients of the offence under
Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code are not made out. It appears from
the allegations in the First Information Report that the non-applicant No.2
has left matrimonial house on 3 rd August 2014 and the complaint is filed by
the non-applicant No.2 with the non-applicant No.1 Police Station on 5 th
January 2015. On overall consideration of the allegations in the First
Information Report and considering the allegations made against the mother-
Judgment 5 apl411.15.odt
in-law and applicant No.3 sister-in-law, who is residing at Buldana and in
view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of K.Subba Rao Vs. State
of Telangana, reported in (2018)14 SCC 452, wherein it is observed that the
relatives of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of vague
allegation unless specific instances of their involvement are set out, we are
satisfied that the First Information Report against the applicant deserves to
be quashed and set aside.
8. We therefore, pass the following order:
The First Information Report bearing Crime No.67 of 2015,
dated 04/05/2015, registered against the applicants with the non-applicant
No.1 Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A and 34
of the Indian Penal Code, is quashed and set aside.
Rule is made absolute accordingly.
(AMIT B. BORKAR, J) (Z.A.HAQ, J)
RRaut..
