Mrs. Indubai Waman Pawar And 3 ... vs The State Of Mah. In The Instance Of ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1998 Bom

                                                       20.wp411.2022.odt




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

            CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 411 OF 2022

1. MRS. INDUBAI WAMAN PAWAR
   Age : 52, Indian Inhabitant,
2. MR. WAMAN DHARU PAWAR
   Age : 62, Indian Inhabitant,

   Both residing at - D Wing, Room
   No.116, Ramchandra Apartment,
   Near Jarimari Temple, Tisgaon,
   Kalyan (E), Maharashtra 421 306.
3 MRS. MADHURI VIKRAM LANDE
   Age 32, Indian Inhabitant,               ... Petitioners
   Residing at - Flat No.403, 4th Floor,
   Yash Platinum, Plot No.81-A,
   Sector - 19, Near Ram Sheth Thakur
   Public School, Kharghar, Raigarh,
   Maharashtra - 410 210
4. MR. MILIND WAMAN PAWAR
   Age 34, Indian Inhabitant,
   Residing at - E 201, Emerald Wing,
   Jewel Arista Building, Near MSDECL
   Power Station, Sonivali Village,
   Badlapur (West) Maharashtra 421503.
                    Versus

1. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
   (In the instance of Sr. Inspector
   Washim Police Station)                  ... Respondents
2. MRS. ARCHANA BHUSHAN PAWAR
   Age - Adult, Indian Inhabitant,
   Residing at - Civil Line, Sarkari
   Quarter, (PWD Government Quarter),
   Gajanan Hotel, Behind Washim Bus
   Depo, Washim - 444505.




                                                          PAGE 1 OF 8
                                                             20.wp411.2022.odt




Ms. Punam D. Pisurde, Advocate for petitioners.
Mr. Mayuri Deshmukh, APP for respondent No.1.
Ms. Aastha R. Sharma, Advocate h/f Shri P.R. Agrawal, Advocate for
respondent No.2.

                         CORAM :         VINAY JOSHI, AND
                                         VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.

DATE : 01.03.2023.

ORAL JUDGMENT: ( PER: Vinay Joshi, J )

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally

by consent of the learned counsel for respective parties.

(2) The petitioners, parents-in-law, brother-in-law and

sister-in-law are seeking to quash First Information Report bearing

Crime No.309/2022, registered with Washim City Police Station, for

the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 315 read with Section

34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3) It is the petitioners contention that the allegations

made in the FIR and related statements does not constitute

commission of alleged offences. According to petitioners, the entire

allegations are omnibus and vague. Besides casual reference of their

names, there is no other material. It is submitted that, even if the

PAGE 2 OF 8

20.wp411.2022.odt

allegations are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety,

do not prima facie constitute any offence and therefore, requested to

quash the proceeding.

(4) At the instance of report lodged by the informant

lady aged about 27 years, crime has been registered. It is the

prosecution case that the couple got married on 14.06.2019 and

started to reside at village Lohgad, Taluka - Barshitkali, District- Akola.

After one week the informant, her husband and parents-in-law shifted

to Kalyan, District - Thane, where the husband was serving as Sales

Assistant. It is alleged that husband was liquor addicted and all the

time, under influence of liquor, used to quarrel and physically assault

the informant. The informant stated that intermittently her sister-in-

law (Madhuri) and brother-in-law (Milind) used to visit their house

and they were cursing her saying that she is of black complexion and

less dowry was offered in the marriage. The parents-in-law were also

blaming for said reason and thus, mentally harassing her.

(5) The informant stated that somewhere in the month

of June 2021, she become pregnant, however her husband has

administered some food items, resultantly, child was aborted. She

PAGE 3 OF 8

20.wp411.2022.odt

stated the story as to how all the time husband used to physically

harassed and assault her. On 14.02.2022, by force husband has

established sexually relations with her under influence of liquor and

finally, she left the matrimonial house.

(6) At the inception, we make it clear that husband is

not before us. The petitioners' her parents-in-law, brother-in-law and

sister-in-law of the victim. The principle contention is that the First

Information Report and investigation papers, merely bears casual

reference of family members of husband without any details.

According to petitioner on the basis of vague allegations petitioners

can not be forced to face the trial. For this purpose, learned counsel

for the petitioners relied on the decision of Supreme Court in Geeta

Mehrotra and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr. reported in

(2012) 10 SCC 741, wherein it has been observed that absence of

specific allegations and prima facie case against the relatives, is a

subject matter of quashing, as requirements is of specific disclosure of

active involvement of the accused. The principle question is whether

the allegations made against petitioners, who are the relatives of

husband are in the nature of general and omnibus, requiring to quash

PAGE 4 OF 8

20.wp411.2022.odt

the prosecution. We have carefully examined the police papers, in

particular First Information Report dated 18.04.2022. On perusal of

entire FIR, we note that the principle allegations are against husband.

We are able to make out following relevant allegations against the

petitioners:-

1) Parents-in-law use to humiliate victim by stating that

less dowry was offered and she is of black complexion.

2) Sister-in-law(Madhuri) and brother-in-law(Milind)

were frequently visiting their house and similarly, harassing

her by saying that she is of black complexion and less dowry

was offered in the marriage.

(7) Besides, these two allegations and general

conclusion at the end of report, we are unable to see any specific

instance demonstrating active role on the part of petitioners.

Apparently, after one week from marriage the couple shifted to reside

separately at Kalyan. Though, it is alleged that parents-in-law also

accompanied them, however, it is stated that they have returned to

village Dhabba, Taluka - Barshitkali, District- Akola. There is no

PAGE 5 OF 8

20.wp411.2022.odt

specification, as to how many days the parents-in-law stayed with the

couple. It is apparent that brother-in-law and sister-in-law are having

their own families and residing separately. It is not specified as to

when they went to Kalyan and mentally harassed the victim.

(8) Learned counsel appearing for petitioners by placing

reliance on the decision of this Court in case of Kahkashan Kausar @

Sonam and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Ors. 2022 SCC Online SC 162 ,

would submit that, tendency of roping all family members in

matrimonial dispute is a routine. The Court has taken note of said

situation and expressed that the Court has to meticulously examine the

facts and find out whether there are specific allegations constituting

the offence. In resistance the learned counsel appearing for informant

took us through the reply and annexed documents. It reveals that the

entire allegations are against husband. Though a bunch of printouts of

whatsapp chat have been produced, she is unable to point out

incriminating material against the petitioners.

(9) The Supreme Court in reported case of State of

Harayana and Ors. Vs. Bhajnanlal and Ors. 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335,

has laid down the guidelines to be adhered while exercising inherent

PAGE 6 OF 8

20.wp411.2022.odt

powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(10) Having regard to the facts, we find that the case of

petitioners would fall in the category of guidelines No.1 and 3, which

reads as below:

"1. Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

2......

3. Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused."

(11) The informant lady has already filed proceeding

under Domestic Violence Act, as well as summary proceeding in terms

of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is pending.

On the other hand, husband has filed divorce petition against the

informant. Apparently, there is a rift in matrimonial relations. The

possibility of implicating all family members to create pressure can not

be ruled out. Considering the overall allegations, which are of general

and vague nature, prima facie, they does not make out role of

PAGE 7 OF 8

20.wp411.2022.odt

petitioners to constitute that they have subjected the victim to physical

and mental cruelty within the meaning of Section 498-A of the Indian

Penal Code. Facing of criminal prosecution is a serious affair to which

one shall not be pushed unless there is substantial material. Having

regard to all above facts, we are satisfied that the case is made out to

exercise our inherent powers.

(12) In view of above, petition is allowed. We hereby

quashed and set aside FIR in Crime No.309/2022, registered with

Washim City Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections

498-A, 315 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, along with

related criminal case bearing RCC No.341/2022, pending on the file of

Judicial Magistrate First Class, Washim, as regards to petitioners only.

(13) Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms, with no

order as to costs.

                          [VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J.]                  [VINAY JOSHI, J.]


               Prity

Signed By:PRITY S GABHANE
Reason:
Location:
Signing Date:04.03.2023 13:13
                                                                                PAGE 8 OF 8