Bombay High Court
Bhalchandra Bapurao Jillawar And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 10 January, 2025
Author: Vibha Kankanwadi
Bench: Vibha Kankanwadi
2025:BHC-AUG:1773-DB
1
3250.2023APPLN.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3250 OF 2023
1. Bhalchandra Bapurao Jillawar
Age : 80 years, Occ : Nil,
2. Shantabai Bhalchandra Jillawar
Age : 74 years, Occ : Household,
Both R/o Tilak Nagar, Pusad,
Tq. Pusad, Dist. Yavatmal
3. Aparna Sujit Mungilwar
Age : 48 years, Occ : Household,
4. Apoorv S/o Sujit Mungilwar
Age : 23 years, Occ : Private Service,
Both R/o tilak Nagar, Pusad, Tq. Pusad,
Dist. Yavatmal
5. Kirti Rajendra Chintwar
Age : 45 years, Occ : Household,
6. Rajendra Bandopant Chintawar
Age : 48 years, Occ : Business,
Both R/o Plot No.167, Kiwansara,
Ulka Nagari, Garkheda Road,
Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad
..APPLICANTS
-VERSUS-
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Purna,
Tq. Purna, Dist. Parbhani
2. Sapna W/o Anirudha Jillawar
Age : 34 years, Occ : Household,
R/o Near Datta Mandir, Purna,
Tq. Purna, Dist. Parbhani
..RESPONDENTS
2
3250.2023APPLN.odt
...
Advocate for the applicants : Mr. Shaikh Majit S.
APP for Respondent- State : Mr. S.A. Gaikwad
Advocate for respondent No.2 : Mr. Prakash S. Paranjape
...
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND
ROHIT W. JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : 10th JANUARY, 2025., 2024.
JUDGMENT (PER ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.) :
. The applicants in the present matter are aggrieved by
registration of offence against them with Police Station, Purna, Dist.
Parbhani, vide F.I.R. No.0175/2023 on 07.08.2023, for the offences
punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34
of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) and Regular Criminal Case
No.206/2023 pending on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate, First
Class, Purna, Dist. Parbhani.
2. Respondent No.2 is the informant, who is related to the
applicants as under :-
(i) Applicant No.1 - father-in-law
(ii) Applicant No.2 - mother-in-law
(iii) Applicant No.3 - married sister-in-law
(iv) Applicant No.4 - son of applicant No.3
(v) Applicant No.5 - married sister-in-law
(vi) Applicant No.6 - husband of applicant No.5
3250.2023APPLN.odt
3. The marriage between respondent No.2 and Anirudha
Jillawar was solemnized on 2nd August, 2018. As per version of
respondent No.2 in the F.I.R., the husband of respondent No.2 treated
her well only for a short period of 10-15 days after her marriage and
thereafter used to filthily abuse her unnecessarily. Respondent No.2
alleges that the husband is addicted to liquor and used to beat her
mercilessly under the influence of liquor. Apart from this, she also
alleges that he used to avoid having physical relationship with her as
that of husband and wife. According to her, the husband used to ask her
to get a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- from her parents for his business of sale
of paints and tyres and used to harass her in order to force her and her
parents to meet the said demand. She has alleged that she was required
to hospitalized at Vishwa Hospital, Nanded on 26.11.2022 because of
acute pain caused due to kidney stone. The husband hospitalized her.
However, he never came back to the hospital after she was admitted.
Respondent No.2 claims that she was required to call her father to get
discharge and from the date of discharge, she is residing at her parental
house since the husband did not come to take her back.
4. As regards Applicant Nos.1 and 2, she alleges that they
illtreat her and abuse her filthily. She has alleged that applicant No.3,
who is her married sister-in-law resides at her parental home i.e.
3250.2023APPLN.odt
matrimonial house of respondent No.2 and she and her son - applicant
No.4 used to constantly illtreat her, abuse her, insult her and further
used to instigate her husband against her. Apart from this, she alleges
that they used to threaten her saying that in the event she becomes
pregnant, they will forcibly get the pregnancy terminated and ensure
that she does not deliver a child.
5. As regards applicant Nos.5 and 6 there are no specific
allegations against them. They are admittedly not residing with
applicant Nos.1 to 4 and husband of respondent No.2. Apart from the
allegations as above, general, omnibus allegations have been levelled
stating that in-laws used to illtreat her, abuse her, at a time did not offer
food to her etc.
6. The husband against whom principal grievance is raised by
respondent No.2 is not a party to the present proceeding. We are
concerned with allegations against applicant Nos.1 to 6, who are
parents-in-law, married sisters-in-law, son of sister-in-law and husband
of another sister-in-law. On perusal of the F.I.R., we find that there are
no allegations against applicant Nos.5 and 6. They have been
unnecessarily arrayed accused in the matter. As regards applicant Nos.1
and 2 also there are no specific allegations. It is merely stated that the
father-in-law and mother-in-law used to harass respondent No.2
3250.2023APPLN.odt
continuously. Material particulars regarding date, time or tentative
period of the alleged illtreatment and harassment are also not
mentioned. General words like harassment, insult etc., have been used
which in our considered opinion, are not sufficient for continuation of
prosecution against applicant Nos.1 and 2 as well. As regards applicant
Nos.3 and 4, who is married sister-in-law and her son, who reside along
with applicant Nos.1 and 2 and husband of respondent No.2, there are
allegations that they used to harass, illtreat and insult respondent No.2.
There are also allegations regarding filthy abuses being hurled at a
respondent No.2. It is also alleged that applicant Nos.3 and 4 have
stated that if respondent No.2 become pregnant they will terminate her
pregnancy so that she does not have a happy family life. We find that
these allegations are also made without providing details with respect
to date, time or tentative period. The alleged abusive words have not
been mentioned. As regards the case of applicant Nos.3 and 4 also
appears to be a case of over implication.
7. Facts of the case reveal that since there was marital discord
between respondent No.2 and her husband, respondent No.2 has
implicated all the family members of the husband in the offence. As
stated above, there are no allegations with respect to demand of dowry
and consequent harassment against the present applicants. The
3250.2023APPLN.odt
allegations in that regard are only against the husband. In order to
implicate other family members, the above allegations appear to have
been made, which as already stated above, are way too general and
vague in nature. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the
F.I.R. and consequent criminal prosecution against the applicants need
to be quashed in the interest of justice. Hence, we pass the following
order :-
ORDER
(i) The application is allowed.
(ii) F.I.R. No. 0175/2023 dated 07.08.2023 registered with Police
Station, Purna, Dist. Parbhani, for the offences punishable under
Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Regular Criminal Case No.206/2023 pending on the file of
learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Purna, Dist. Parbhani are
hereby quashed against applicants namely (i) Bhalchandra Bapurao
Jillawar, (ii) Shantabai Bhalchandra Jillawar, (iii) Aparna Sujit
Mungilwar, (iv) Apoorv S/o Sujit Mungilwar, (v) Kirti Rajendra
Chintwar and (vi) Rajendra Bandopant Chintawar.
[ROHIT W. JOSHI] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI]
JUDGE JUDGE
sga/
