Bombay High Court
Amol S/O. Shrihari Dabhade And ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Police ... on 12 January, 2021
Bench: Z.A. Haq, Amit B. Borkar
1
APL273.18.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.273 OF 2018
1. Amol S/o. Shrihari Dabhade,
Aged about 31 years, Occ. Agriculturist,
2. Sumanbai wd/o. Shrihari Dabhade,
Aged about 61 years, Occ. Household,
Both R/o. Deurwada, Tah. Chandur
Bazar, Dist. Amravati.
3. Sau. Ujwala W/o. Ramdas Kurhade,
Aged about 40 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. Ghatladki, Tah. Chandur Bazar,
Dist. Amravati.
4. Sau. Nalini W/o. Gopalrao Darokar,
Aged about 35 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. Hiwarkhed, Tah. Morshi,
Dist. Amravati.
5. Sau. Archana W/o. Vijayrao Pokale,
Aged about 33 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. Ambala, Tah. Morshi,
Dist. Amravati.
6. Sau. Pranjali W/o. Nileshrao Nichat,
Aged about 27 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. Nerpinglai, Tah. Morshi,
Dist. Amravati. . . . . APPLICANTS
.....VERSUS......
1. State of Maharashtra through
Police Station Officer,
Police Station Sirajgaon,
Tah. Chandur Bazar,
Dist. Amravati.
2. Mrs. Asmita W/o. Amol Dabhade,
(Before marriage Asmita Bhaurao Amzare)
::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 07/02/2021 12:53:22 :::
2
APL273.18.odt
Aged about 27 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. Deurwada, Tah. Chandur Bazar,
Dist. Amravati. . . . . NON-APPLICANTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Gayatri R.Diwe, Advocate h/f Shri P.R.Agrawal, Advocate for
applicants.
Ms. Mayuri Deshmukh, APP for respondent no.1.
Shri S.S.Singane, Advocate for respondent no.2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM :- Z. A. HAQ AND
AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED :- 12.01.2021
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Amit B. Borkar, J)
1. Heard.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by
consent of the learned Advocate and learned APP appearing
for the respective parties.
3. This is an application under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure challenging First Information
Report bearing no.19/2008 dated 25.1.2018 registered with
the non-applicant no.1 - Police Station for offences punishable
under Sections 498-A, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
4. The First Information Report came to be registered
against the applicants with the allegations that the applicant
no.1 being husband and the applicant nos. 2 to 6 being family
APL273.18.odt
members casts doubt on character of the non-applicant no.2
and physically and mentally harassed to the non-applicant no.2
by demanding dowry. The non-applicant no.2 tried to settle
the matter before the Women's Protection Committee.
5. The applicants have, therefore, challenged the
First Information Report by way of filing the present
application. The applicant no.1 is the husband. The applicant
no.2 is the mother-in-law of the non-applicant no.2; whereas
applicant nos.3 to 6 are the sisters-in-law of the non-applicant
no.2, who are not residing at the matrimonial place of the
applicant no.1 and the non-applicant no.2. The dates of the
marriage of applicant nos.3 to 6 are 13.5.1999, 23.6.2003,
15.5.2010 and 18.6.2017. The Fist Information Report is dated
25.1.2018.
6. We have carefully considered the allegations made
in the First Information Report. The offence alleged against the
applicants are under Sections 498-A, 504 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code. `Cruelty' as defined under Section 498-A
of the Indian Penal Code must meet the following
requirements:
(i) there should be harassment of woman;
APL273.18.odt
(ii) harassment should be with a view to coercing her or any
person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any
property or valuable security;
(iii) the harassment may be on account of failure by woman
or any other person related to her to meet any such demand
earlier made.
7. Now-a-days, it has become a tendency to make
vague and omnibus allegations on every member of the family
of the husband invoking Section 498-A of the Indian Penal
Code by making one or the other allegations. Hence, it has
become necessary for the Courts to careful scrutinize the
allegations and to find out if he allegations made really
constitute offence and prima facie meet the requirements of
law. The allegations in the First Information Report, we find
that the allegations are vague in nature and specific instances
of the involvement of the applicants are not set out in the First
Information Report. As stated above, the applicant nos.3 to 6
were not residing at their matrimonial place of the non-
applicant no.2.
Insofar as the allegations for attracting ingredients of
Sections 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code are concerned,
we have scrutinized the contents of the allegations made
APL273.18.odt
against the applicants in the context of fulfillment of Section
504 of the Indian Penal Code punishable under Section 506 of
the Indian Penal Code. The allegations alleged against the
applicants, even if accepted to be correct, do not fulfill the
ingredients of offence under Section 504 punishable under
Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
8. We are, therefore, satisfied that the continuance of
the proceedings would amount to abuse of process of the
Court. We, therefore, pass the following order:
First Information Report No.19/2018 dated 25.1.2018
registered with the non-applicant no.1 - Police Station for
offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 504 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside.
Rule is made absolute accordingly.
JUDGE JUDGE
Ambulkar
