Bombay High Court
Rajendra S/O. Hiraman Kankute And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 12 January, 2021
Bench: T.V. Nalawade, M. G. Sewlikar
(1) cri appln 4183.19
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4183 OF 2019
1. Rajenra S/o Hiraman Kankute,
Age: 51 years, Occu. Agril,
R/o. A/957 Rmai, Ashok Nagar,
Vasamat, Tal. Vasamat,
Dist. Hingoli.
2. Hiraman S/o Kishanrao Kunkute,
Age: 79 years, Occ. Occu.,
R/o. A/957 Rmai, Ashok Nagar,
Vasamat, Tal. Vasamat,
Dist. Hingoli.
3. Suresh S/o Balaji Bansode,
Age: 29 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. Karkhana Road, Samrat Colony,
Vasamat, Tal. Vasamat,
Dist. Hingoli.
At Present. 8 Babu Mahatre Chawl,
Kopargaon Sima Mandap Kopar,
Tal. Kalyan, Dist. Thane.
4. Shital D/o Balaji Bansode,
@ Shital W/o Dhammanand Datar,
Age: 27 years, Occ: Household,
R/o. Mahatargaon Tal. Vasmat,
Dist. Hingoli.
5. Latabai D/o Hiraman Kankute,
Age: 52 years, Occ: Household,
R/o. A/957 Rmai, Ashok Nagar,
Vasamat, Tal. Vasamat,
Dist. Hingoli. ... Applicants
::: Uploaded on - 22/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 07/02/2021 13:22:49 :::
(2) cri appln 4183.19
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Harsul Police Station,
Aurangabad.
2. Diksha W/o Rajendra Kankute,
Age: 37 years, Occ: Household,
R/o. Hamukhatri Nagar, Harsul Parisar,
Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad.
... Respondents
...
Advocate for Applicants : Mr. S.B. Choudhari
APP for Respondents/State : Mr. M.M. Nerlikar
Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. S.M. Pachore
...
CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE &
M.G. SEWLIKAR, JJ.
DATE : 12.01.2021
JUDGMENT : (Per: M.G. Sewlikar, J.)
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned A.P.P. and the
learned advocate for the respondent no.2 waive service. With the consent of
both the sides the matter is heard finally at the stage of admission.
2. By this application the applicants are pressing into service the
provisions of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR No.257 of 2019
under Section 498-A, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. registered
with Harsul Police Station, Aurangabad.
::: Uploaded on - 22/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 07/02/2021 13:22:49 :::
(3) cri appln 4183.19
3. Narrations made in the FIR show that respondent no.2 married
applicant no.1 on 25.11.2018 at Ashok Nagar, Vasamat, Tq. Vasamat, District
Hingoli.
4. Applicant no.2 is the father, applicant no.3 is the cousin brother,
applicant nos.4 and 5 are the cousin sisters of applicant no.1. After one
month of the marriage applicant nos.4 and 5 started harassing respondent
no.2. They got her pregnancy test done against her wish and thereafter said
to her that she would never get pregnant. Both of them said that if she
wanted to stay at her matrimonial place she should bring Rupees Two Lakhs
from her brother. She was thereafter turned out of the house. When brother
of respondent no.2 called up applicant no.1, the applicant no.1 said that
relative of applicant no.5 had passed away. Therefore, her brother had gone
to attend the funeral on 13.01.2019. At that time, applicants abused the
brother and mother of respondent no.2 and demanded Rupees Two Lakhs for
maintaining her. Thereafter, respondent no.2 lodged the report in the police
station on 23.10.2019.
5. Heard Shri S.B. Choudhari learned counsel for the applicants ,
Shri M.M. Nerlikar learned APP for the State and Shri S.M. Pachore learned
counsel for the respondent no.2.
::: Uploaded on - 22/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 07/02/2021 13:22:49 :::
(4) cri appln 4183.19
6. When we expressed our disinclination to grant any relief to
applicant nos.1, 2 and 5, learned counsel Shri Choudhari sought permission to
withdraw the application to their extent. Permission was accordingly granted.
7. On perusal of the charge-sheet filed during the pendency of this
application, it is seen that applicant no.3 is the resident of Babu Mahatre
Chawl, Kopargaon Sima Mandap Kopar, Tal. Kalyan, Dist. Thane and applicant
no.4 is the resident of Mahatargaon, Tal. Vasamat, District Hingoli. Charge-
sheet further shows that applicant nos.1, 2 and 5 are the residents of Ashok
Nagar, Vasamat Tq. Vasamat, District Hingoli. This clearly shows that
applicant nos.3 and 4 are not staying with applicant nos.1, 2 and 5. The only
allegation made against applicant nos.3 and 4 is that they got pregnancy test
of respondent no.2 done against her will and stated that she would never
beget any child and said that she should bring Rupees Two Lakhs from her
brother. These allegations are sans of any details. No date, no time is
mentioned in the FIR. No overt act is attributed to any of the applicant nos.3
and 4. Charge-sheet itself shows that applicant nos.3 and 4 are residing at far
off places. Having regard to this and in view of vague and general allegations
it cannot be said that any cognizable offence is made out against the applicant
nos.3 and 4. Therefore, continuation of prosecution would be nothing but an
::: Uploaded on - 22/01/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 07/02/2021 13:22:49 :::
(5) cri appln 4183.19
exercise in futility. Even if the allegations made in the FIR are accepted at
their face value there is no possibility of conviction of applicant nos.3 and 4.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently held that there is growing
tendency to implicate all the relatives of the husband even if they are residing
at far off places. In the case at hand also applicant nos.3 and 4 are living at
different places still they are implicated in these offences. In view of this, we
are inclined to quash the FIR to the extent of applicant nos.3 and 4. Hence
the following order is passed:
ORDER
I) Application of applicant nos.1, 2 and 5 is disposed of as
withdrawn.
II) Application of applicant nos.3 and 4 is allowed.
Relief is granted in terms of prayer clause-B-1. Rule made
absolute in those terms.
[M.G. SEWLIKAR, J.] [T.V. NALAWADE, J.]
mub
