Bombay High Court
Arun S/O. Ramdasji Ghanmode vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Its ... on 14 July, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande, Amit B. Borkar
Judgment 1 apl794.18.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 794/2018
1] Arun S/O. Ramdasji Ghanmode,
Aged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculturist
2] Bhushan S/O. Arun Ghanmode,
Aged about 22 years, Occ. Student
3] Yograj S/O. Arun Ghanmode
(through His Natural Guardian -
Father, Arun S/O. Ramdasji Ghanmode),
Aged about 17 years, Occ. Student
Applicant nos. 1 to 3 are R/o. S.T. Colony,
Jam Road, Yavatmal
4] Ramdasji S/O. Damduji Ghanmode,
Aged about 85 years, Occ. Agriculturist
5] Hansabai Ramdasji Damduji Ghanmode,
Aged about 79 years, Occ. Housewife
Applicant nos. 4 and 5 are R/o. Shanti
Nagar, Ralegaon, Dist. Yavatmal
6] Anil S/O. Ramdasji Ghanmode,
Aged about 52 years, Occ. Service
7] Priya W/O. Anil Ghanmode
(Nitravila W/O. Anil Ghanmode As per FIR),
Aged about 42 years, Occ. Housewife
Applicant nos. 6 & 7 are R/o. Jamnagar,
Yavatmal
.... APPLICANT(S)
// VERSUS //
1] State of Maharashtra,
Through its PSO,
Wadgaon Road Police Station,
Yavatmal
::: Uploaded on - 16/07/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 16/07/2021 22:47:44 :::
Judgment 2 apl794.18.odt
2] Lata @ Swarnalata W/o Arun Ghanmode,
Aged about 44 years, Occ. Housewife,
R/o. C/o. Tara Chand Bhaduji Kamble,
Maregaon, Tah. Maregaon, District Yavatmal
.... NON-APPLICANT(S)
*******************************************************************
Shri A. Subhan, Advocate for the applicant(s)
Ms. M.A. Barabde, APP for the non-applicant no. 1
Shri G.S. Sengar, Advocate (appt.) for the non-applicant no. 2
*******************************************************************
CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
JULY 14, 2021
JUDGMENT : (PER:- AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)
1] Heard.
2] RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith.
3] This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure challenging registration of F.I.R. No. 1039/2018 registered with
the non-applicant no. 1 - Police Station on 03/08/2018 for the offences
punishable under Sections 498-A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
4] The first information report came to be registered against the
applicants with the accusations that the marriage between the applicant
no. 1 and the non-applicant no. 2 was performed on 21/04/1995. Thereafter
immediately, the applicants physically and mentally harassed the non-
applicant no. 2 on the ground of non-payment of dowry. It is alleged that the
Judgment 3 apl794.18.odt
applicants on 28/05/2018 did not allow the non-applicant no. 2 to enter the
house and therefore the non-applicant no. 2 was constrained to reside with
her parents. The non-applicant no. 2 therefore lodged first information report
on 03/08/2018. The applicants have therefore challenged registration of the
first information report by filing the present application.
5] This Court on 03/09/2018 issued notices to the non-applicants
for final disposal. The matter was sent for mediation to explore the possibility
of settlement, but the report of the mediator shows that the matter is not
settled.
6] We have heard the learned advocates for the respective parties
and also carefully considered the allegations in the first information report. It
appears that the applicant nos. 2 and 3 are the sons of the applicant no.1 and
non-applicant no. 2, the applicant nos. 4 and 5 are father-in-law and mother-
in-law of the non-applicant no. 2, the applicant nos. 6 and 7 are brother-in-
law and sister-in-law of the non-applicant no. 2. The marriage between the
applicant no.1 and the non-applicant no. 2 was solemnized on 21/04/1995
and out of the said wedlock, the applicant no. 1 and non-applicant no. 2 have
two sons (applicant nos. 2 and 3, aged about 22 years and 17 years
respectively). It is pertinent to note that the first information report is lodged
by the non-applicant no. 2 against her own sons i.e. applicant nos. 2 and 3.
Now a days, it has become tendency to make vague and omnibus allegations
against every member of the family of the husband involving everybody
Judgment 4 apl794.18.odt
under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code by making one or the other
allegations. Hence, it has become necessary for the Courts to carefully
scrutinize the allegations and find out if the allegations made really
constitute an offence and meets the requirements of law at least prima-facie.
7] It is true that while considering quashing of criminal case under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court should not embark
upon and enquire into truthfulness of the allegations made by the
complainant but, it becomes duty of the High Courts to intervene in the case,
where refusal to interfere would amount to miscarriage of justice. The
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K. Subba Rao and Others Vs. State of
Telangana and Others reported in (2018) 14 SCC 452 observed that relatives
of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of vague allegations
unless specific instances of their involvement are set out. We are therefore
satisfied that the allegations against the applicants are vague in nature. There
are no specific instances given in the first information report setting out the
role of the applicants. The non-applicant no. 2 has not given the date, month
or year when the alleged physical and mental harassment was caused to her
by the applicants. On overall scrutiny of the first information report, we are
satisfied that the allegations in the first information report do not make out
offences alleged against the applicants as the said allegations are vague in
nature.
Judgment 5 apl794.18.odt
8] Hence, the following order:-
(a) F.I.R. No. 1039/2018 registered with the non-
applicant no. 1 - Police Station on 03/08/2018 against the
applicants for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and
34 of the Indian Penal Code is quashed and set aside.
(b) Fees of the advocate appointed to represent the
non-applicant no. 2 is quantified at Rs. Two Thousand which
shall be paid to him.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Pending
application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(JUDGE) (JUDGE)
ANSARI
