Bhagwan Narayan Deshmukh And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 12769 Bom

                                                        977CA1437.21
                                      1

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                977 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1437 OF 2021

 1.       Bhagwan S/o. Narayan Deshmukh,
          Age. 74 years, Occ : Agri.,
          R/o. House No. 4/1149, Muran Park, Vaijapur,
          Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.

 2.       Yogita D/o. Bhagwan Deshmukh,
          Age : Major, Occ : Household,
          R/o. As above.

 3.       Charushila @ Padma W/o. Sunil Ghadge,
          Age. Major, Occ : Advocate,
          R/o. C/o. Narayan Ghadge, 1468,
          Krupa Hospital, Kamgar Nagar,
          Saipur, Nashik.

 4.       Rahul W/o. Bhagwan Deshmukh,
          Age. Major, Occ : Agri.,
          R/o. Murari Park, Vaijapur,
          Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.                        ...Applicants.

                           Versus

 1.       State of Maharashtra,
          Through Police Inspector,
          Vaijapur Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad.

 2.       Swati W/o. Yashwant Deshmukh,
          Age. 29 years, Occ : Household,
          R/o. House No. 4/1149, Murari Park,
          Vaijapur, Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.          ...Respondents.


          As per Court's order dated 14.07.2021, Cri. Application
          is dismissed as withdrawn against Applicant No. 1.

          Advocate for Applicants No. 2 to 4 : Mrs. P.V. Langhe.
          APP for Respondent No. 1 : Mr. A.S. Shinde.
          Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mrs. A.N. Gore-Shirsath.


::: Uploaded on - 09/09/2021                  ::: Downloaded on - 09/09/2021 23:04:29 :::
                                                        977CA1437.21
                                     2

                                 CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH AND
                                         NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, JJ.
                                 DATED : 07.09.2021


 JUDGMENT (PER : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.) :

1. At the outset, the learned Advocate for the applicants seeks

permission to withdraw the application to the extent of applicant No.

2. Permission is granted. Application is disposed of as withdrawn

for applicants No. 2 and 4.

3. The present application seeks quashing of the FIR in Crime No.

I - 243/2021 registered with Vaijapur Police Station, District

Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 452,

354, 323, 509, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal

Code. The impugned FIR was lodged by respondent No. 2. The

applicant No. 3 is sister-in-law of the respondent No. 2.

4. In short, it is alleged that in the FIR that the marriage of

respondent No. 2 with Yashwant Deshmukh (brother of applicant No.

3) took place in the year 2010, after the marriage the informant

stayed with her husband's in-laws for about four years. At that time

her mother-in-law and sister-in-law Yogita used to ill-treat and beat

her. They used to allege that the informant used to indulge in black

977CA1437.21

magic. Therefore, she started residing separately with her husband.

Since one year prior to the lodging of FIR, the in-laws started

demanding Rs. 5,00,000/- saying that the informant and her husband

should vacate the house which belongs to her father-in-law. The

applicant No. 3 came and resided at her maternal home for eight days

and at that time she used to abuse the informant. The other

allegations are attributed to the father-in-law, mother-in-law and

brother-in-law.

5. The applicant No. 3 is married and is a practicing advocate

staying with her husband at Nashik. She is suffering from 42%

disability. According to her, only with a view to harass her and to

pressurize the in-laws, her name is involved in the present crime. No

specific role is attributed to her in the FIR. She, therefore, claims that

continuation of the FIR is an abuse of process of law. Hence, the FIR

needs to be quashed.

6. Heard the learned Advocate for applicant No. 3, learned APP

for respondent No. 1/State and the learned Advocate for respondent

No. 2.

7. We have perused the Criminal Application and the documents

annexed thereto. It is not disputed that the applicant No. 3 is a

977CA1437.21

practicing advocate and residing at Nashik with her husband since

more than twenty years. She is suffering from 42% disability.

8. In the FIR, vague and general allegations are levelled against

the applicant No. 3. No details are given as to when she came to her

maternal home and ill-treated the informant. It appears from the

record that only with a view to pressurize the in-laws and to harass

the present applicant, she roped in the present crime. It is difficult to

even, prima facie, accept the allegations of the informant that from

Nashik, the applicant No. 3 used to come and harass her.

9. In our considered view, the prosecution of applicant No. 3 in

the present crime is an abuse of process of law. We, therefore, allow

the Criminal Application to the extent of applicant No. 3 - Charushila

@ Padma W/o. Sunil Ghadge and quashed the FIR at Crime No. I -

243/2021 registered with Vaijapur Police Station, District

Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 452,

354, 323, 509, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

( NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J. ) ( SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J. )

S.P.C.