Bombay High Court
Surendra Krishnakant Chaudhary And 5 ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr The Pso Ps ... on 12 November, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:11926-DB
933-apl18.21.odt 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) No.18 OF 2021
(Surendra Krishnakant Chaudhary and others Vs. State of Maharashtra, through PSO, PS
Gadge Nagar, Amravati, Tq. and Distt. Amravati and another)
__________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
Ms. Sapna S. Jadhav, Advocate for applicants.
Mr. N.B. Jawade, APP for non-applicant No.1.
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 12th NOVEMBER, 2025.
1. The present application is preferred by the
applicants under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code
for quashing of First Information Report in connection with
Crime No.241/2020, registered with Police Station Gadge
Nagar, Amravati for the offence punishable under Section
498-A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The application is filed on the ground that the crime
is registered on the basis of report lodged by the non-applicant
No.2 on an allegations that her marriage was performed with
the applicant No.1 on 18.4.2019. After marriage she resumed
cohabitation at the house of the present applicants. The
applicant No.1 is husband, applicant Nos.2 and 3 are the
in-laws, applicant No.4 is sister-in-law, applicant No.5 is
brother-in-law and applicant No.6 is maternal aunt of the
applicant No.1.
3. As per the allegations in the First Information
Report that after marriage she resumed co-habitation but there
was no relationship between the applicant No.1 and her as far
933-apl18.21.odt 2/4
as the husband and wife is concerned. She further alleged that
the parents of applicant No.1 used to quarrel with her and
general allegation is levelled against them that they used to
abuse her on any trifle reason. Therefore, she constrained to
leave matrimonial house. On the basis of the said report, the
Police have registered the crime against the present applicants.
4. Heard learned counsel for the applicants. He
submitted that as far as the applicant No.6 is concerned, who is
resident of Kolhapur. She never stayed along with the
applicant Nos.1 to 3 and the non-applicant No.2. Therefore,
question of ill-treatment at her hands doesn't arise. She further
invited our attention towards the fact that the applicant Nos.4
and 5 are also residing at U.K. and Bangalore respectively.
Therefore, the allegations against them that they also ill-treated
her appears to be there, merely because they are the relatives
of the applicant No.1. As far as the applicant Nos.1 to 3 are
concerned general and omnibus allegations are levelled against
them. Even accepting the allegations at its face value no
offence is made out as nothing is on record to show that what
nature of the cruelty was subjected to the non-applicant No.2.
Mere contention that she was subjected for the cruelty is not
sufficient as far as the allegations are concerned. She
submitted that in catena of decisions the Hon'ble Apex Court
has taken a view that merely because the applicants are
relatives, they cannot be implicated as an accused in the
offence registered under Section 498A of the Indian Penal
Code. She submitted that considering that the First
Information Report depicts that vague, general and omnibus
allegations are made against the accused persons. No purpose
933-apl18.21.odt 3/4
would be served by forcing them to face the trial. In view of
that, the application deserves to be allowed.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor though
strongly opposed the said application. He submitted that no
specific instances are narrated by the victim. He submitted that
considering their specific role attributed to all the applicants,
application deserves to be rejected. Learned counsel for the
complainant also endorsed the same contentions.
6. After going through the entire investigation papers
and after perusal of the First Information Report and the
various statements of the witnesses, there is no dispute that the
general, vague and omnibus allegations are levelled as far as
the applicants are concerned. No specific instances are
narrated as to the ill-treatment. The nature of the ill-treatment
is also not narrated by the victim. Therefore, there is no
possibility of establishing the offence, if the trial is conducted.
Moreover, the applicant Nos.4,5 and 6 never resided along with
the applicant Nos.1,2,3 and non-applicant No.2. Their
involvement appears to be there, merely because they are the
relatives of the applicant No.1. In catena of decisions the
Hon'ble Apex Court has considered that the involvement of
other relatives is to be avoided and they can't be implicated as
an accused merely because they are the relatives of the
husband. Especially, it is observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court
in the case of Mange Ram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and
another, reported in MANU/SC/1066/2025, by referring the
judgment in Dara Laxmi Narayana and others Vs. State of
Telengana and another, reported in MANU/SC/1309/2024,
wherein it has been made clear that the family members of the
933-apl18.21.odt 4/4
husband ought not to be unnecessarily roped into criminal
proceeding arising out of matrimonial dispute. The Court
observed that it has become recurring tendency to implicate
every member of the husband's family irrespective of their role
or actual involvement, merely because a dispute has arisen
between these two spouses.
7. Here in the present case even there are general
allegations as far as husband is concerned and no specific
instances are narrated as it is apparent that as the relationship
as husband and wife between the applicant No.1 and non-
applicant No.2 was not established and, therefore, the First
Information Report came to be lodged. Considering the nature
of allegations levelled against the present applicants no
prima facie case is made out. In view of that forcing the
applicants to face the trial would be the abuse of process of
law. In view of that, the application deserves to be allowed.
Accordingly, we proceed to pass following order :
ORDER
(i) The application is allowed.
(ii) The First Information Report in
connection with Crime No.241/2020, registered with Police
Station Gadge Nagar, Amravati for the offence punishable
under Section 498 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code is hereby quashed and set aside.
(iii) The application is disposed of in the
abovesaid terms.
(Nandesh S. Deshpande, J.) (Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.)
Wadode
Signed by: Mr. Devendra Wadode
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 13/11/2025 10:51:59
