Bombay High Court
Nitin S/O. Balu Kamble And Others vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso, Mankapur Ps, ... on 18 November, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:12563-DB
(1) 950. APL1344.23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1344 OF 2023
Nitin S/o Balu Kamble And Ors.
Vs.
State of Maharashtra,Thr. Its PSO, P.S. Mankapur, Dist. Nagpur & Ors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. A. V. Wankhede, Advocate for applicants
Mr. D. N. Mudgale, Advocate for non-applicant no. 2
Mr. Nikhil Joshi, APP for non-applicant/State
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATED : 18.11.2025
1. Present application is preferred by the applicants
for quashing of the First Information Report, in connection
with Crime No. 25/2023, registered under Sections 498A,
323, 504, 506, read with Section 34 of IPC.
2. The applicant no. 1 is the husband, applicant
nos. 2 and 3 are the in-laws, applicant nos. 4 and 7 are the
sister-in-law, applicant nos. 5 and 8 are the brother-in-law,
and applicant no. 6 is uncle-in-law.
3. The crime is registered on the basis of the report
lodged by the informant, on an allegation that her marriage
was performed with the applicant no. 1 on 06.01.2021.
After marriage, she resume the cohabitation at the house of
the present applicants. Initially, there was dispute between
her and her husband on account of the trifle domestic
(2) 950. APL1344.23
issues. It is further alleged that the other applicants were
instigating her husband, and on their instigation, he used to
ill-treat her physically as well as mentally. She further
alleged that the applicant no. 1 is also demanded Rs. 50 lacs
from her, and on that count, assaulted her fist and kick
blows. On the basis of the said report, police have registered
the crime against the present applicants.
4. Heard learned counsel for the applicants,
submitted that as far as the allegations are levelled against
the present applicants are concerned, which are general,
omnibus, and vague in nature, no specific instances are
narrated by the informant as far as the instigation on the
part of the other applicants. On the contrary, applicant no. 2
and 3 are residing at Satara, the applicant no. 4 and 5 are
residing at Palghar, applicant no. 6 is residing at Satara,
whereas the applicant no. 7 and 8 are residing at Pune,
which far away from the place where the applicant no. 1
and the non-applicant no. 2 were residing, therefore
question of visiting at their house and ill-treatment doesn't
arise. The recital of the F.I.R. nowhere shows that at any
point of time these applicants have visited the house of the
applicant no. 1 and non-applicant no. 2 and in her presence
instigated her husband to ill-treat the present non-
applicants. Merely because they are the members of the
family of the husband, they are implicated in the alleged
offence on the basis of the baseless and general allegations.
He submitted that considering the nature of the allegations
which revealed from the statements of the witnesses, no
(3) 950. APL1344.23
prima facie case is made out and there are remote chances
of establishing the guilt of the present applicants. In view of
that, the application deserves to be allowed. Learned APP
and learned counsel for the complainant strongly opposed
for the said on the ground that considering the statements
of the witnesses and the statement of the informant, it is
specifically alleged by her that the present applicants who
are in-laws, instigated her husband, and on their instigation
her husband was ill-treating her. In view that, application
deserves to be rejected.
5. After hearing both the sides, and on perusal of
the entire investigation papers, the nature of the allegations
against the present applicants, especially the applicant nos.
2 to 8, are concerned that they were instigating applicant
no. 1, and the applicant no. 1 was ill-treating her mentally
as well as physically. Admittedly, the applicant no. 2 and 3
are residing at Satara and not residing with the applicant
no. 1 and non-applicant no. 2, other applicants are also
residing at various places which is far away from the place
of the applicant no. 1 and non-applicant no. 2. She has not
narrated any incident that at any point of time these
applicants have visited the house of the applicant no. 1 and
the non-applicant no. 2 and in her presence instigated.
Thus, it is apparent that merely because the dispute arose
between these spouse the alleged FIR came to be lodged. It
is pertinent to note that the FIR came to be lodged after
husband filed N.C. complaints against the non-applicant no.
2. As far as the husband is concerned, admittedly there
(4) 950. APL1344.23
specific allegation against him to that extent of demand of
money and assault her fist and kick blows. Therefore, the
prayer of the applicant no. 1 cannot be considered for
quashing of the FIR at this stage.
6. At this stage, reference can be given to the
observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam vs. The State of Bihar, reported
in (2022) 6 SCC 599, where in it is observed as under :-
"The above-mentioned decisions clearly
demonstrate that this court has at numerous
instances expressed concern over the misuse of
section 498A IPC and the increased tendency of
implicating relatives of the husband in matrimonial
disputes, without analysing the long term
ramifications of a trial on the complainant as well as
the accused. It is further manifest from the said
judgments that false implication by way of general
omnibus allegations made in the course of
matrimonial dispute, if left unchecked would result
in misuse of the process of law. Therefore, this court
by way of its judgments has warned the courts from
proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of the
husband when no prima facie case is made out
against them."
(5) 950. APL1344.23
7. In the light of the above, the observation, if the
allegations in the present case are taken into consideration,
admittedly the general and omnibus allegations are levelled,
and the applicants are implicated merely because they are
relatives of the applicant no. 1. This aspect is also
considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dara
Lakshmi Narayan and Others vs. State of Telangana and
Others, reported in MANU/SC/1309/2024, wherein the
Hon'ble Apex Court has made it clear that the family
members of the husband ought not to be unnecessarily
roped into criminal proceeding arising out of matrimonial
discord. 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.
8. In view of the above observations, and in the
light of the allegations levelled against present applicants,
admittedly no prima facie case is made out against the
applicant no. 2 to 8, and therefore the application deserves
to be allowed partly. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the
following order: -
ORDER
(i) Application is allowed partly.
(ii) The First Information Report in connection with
Crime No. 25/2023 registered under Sections 498A, 323,
504, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and
(6) 950. APL1344.23
consequent proceeding R.C.C. No. 3270/2023 is quashed
against the applicant nos. 2 to 8 i.e. applicant no. 2 - Balu
s/o Sahebrao Kamble, applicant no. 3 - Kanta w/o Balu
Kamble, applicant no. 4- Vishakha w/o Shekhar Bansode,
applicant no. 5 - Shekhar s/o Bista Bansode, Applicant no. 6
- Vinayak s/o Sahebrao Kamble, applicant no. 7 - Archana
w/o Somnath Gaikwad and applicant no. 8 - Somnath s/o
Shankar Gaikwad.
(iii) The prayer of the applicant no. 1 - Nitin s/o balu
Kamble for quashing of the First Information report is
hereby rejected.
(iv) The application is disposed of in the above said
terms.
(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)
Shubham
