[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Mahesh Uttamrao Mokashe vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 16 February, 2026
2026:BHC-AUG:6650-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 611 OF 2024
Mahesh Uttamrao Mokashe
Age : 39 yrs, Occu : Service
R/o. Sanjivani Colony, Chopda
Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon ... APPLICANT
(Accused No.4)
(Brother in law)
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Chopda Rural Police Station, Chopda
Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon
2. Bhagyashree Yogesh Mokashe
Age : 26 years, Occu : Household,
R/o. Hated Village
Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon ... RESPONDENTS
(No.2 Orig. Complainant)
...
Mr. A. R. Syed, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. D. Ghayal, APP for Respondent/State
AND
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1434 OF 2025
1. Mangalabai Uttamrao Mokashe
Age : 59 yrs, Occu : Household (Mother in law)
2. Uttamrao Dhondu Mokashe
Age : 60 yrs, Occu : Agri
Both R/o. Hated Bk.
Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon ... APPLICANTS
(Father in law)
VERSUS
criapln1434.25.odt 1 of 5
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Officer,
Chopda Rural Police Station, Chopda
Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon
2. Bhagyashree Yogesh Mokashe
Age : 26 years, Occu : Household,
R/o. Hated Village
Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon ... RESPONDENTS
(No.2 Orig. Complainant)
...
Mr. A. R. Syed, Advocate for Applicants
Mr. S. D. Ghayal, APP for Respondent/State
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
DATED : 16th FEBRUARY, 2026
FINAL ORDER :-
1. The applicants seeks quashment of FIR dated 18.09.2023 in
Crime No. 171/2023, registered with Chopda (Rural) Police Station, District
Jalgaon for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 510
read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.
2. The investigation was set in motion on the basis of information
given by Respondent No.2 stating that on 25.01.2015 she married with
accused No.1-Yogesh. After marriage, she resided along with her in-laws.
Initially, she was treated well, however, her husband was addicted to vices like
drinking and gambling. He started ill-treating her. She was forced to leave
matrimonial home at several occasions.
3. On 16.09.2023, when she was at home, her husband arrived in
criapln1434.25.odt 2 of 5
drunken condition and raised demand for Rs.1,50,000/-. On refusal to accede
with his demand, he assaulted her. It is alleged that Applicants/in-law
supported husband in his demand. The aforesaid information culminated into
registration of Crime No. 171/2023 against in all four accused persons. The
applicants before this Court are father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-
law of informant. It appears that investigation progressed in pursuance to
registration of offence and charge-sheet has been filed against applicants in
the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Chopda. Eventually, R.C.C. No.
229/203 is pending trial before Court.
4. Mr. A. R. Syed, learned Advocate appearing for applicants
submits that allegations in FIR are general and vague. The contents of FIR and
charge-sheet are not sufficient to make out any offence against applicants. No
specific attributions are made in FIR or statements of witnesses so as to attract
charged offences.
5. Learned APP opposes the applications.
6. Although notice is served upon Respondent No.2, none appeared.
7. A perusal of FIR would suggest that Respondent No.2 married
with Yogesh in year 2015. The couple is blessed with two children. Since date
of marriage, she was residing along with her husband. The applicants herein
were separately residing. Applicants in Criminal Application No.1434 of 2025
criapln1434.25.odt 3 of 5
were residing in a separate accommodation in same town, whereas applicant
in Criminal Application No. 611 of 2024 was residing at Chopda as he was
serving at Hated. The FIR itself stipulates that there were differences between
informant as husband had vices like drinking liquor and gambling. The gist of
allegation reveals that grievance of informant is mainly against her husband.
The only allegation against applicants is that they abused her and blamed her
for vices of Yogesh. A perusal of charge-sheet shows that statement of father,
mother, sister and other relatives recorded during investigation are hearsay
and contains general omnibus stereotyped allegations. In aforesaid backdrop,
it is evident that ingredients of offence under Sections 498-A or 510 of Indian
Penal Code would not attract against Applicants.
8. Accused No.1/husband, died after lodging of FIR. The present
applicants were not residing in shared accommodation along with informant.
They are implicated as accused only on the basis of general and omnibus
allegations. In this backdrop, reference can be given to the observations of
Supreme Court in case of Preeti Gupta and another Versus State of Jharkhand
and another, (2010) 7 Supreme Court Cases 667 , wherein Supreme Court
cautioned about tendency of implicating husband and all his immediate
relations. It is further observed that, long and protracted criminal trials lead to
rancour, acrimony and bitterness in the relationship amongst the parties. It is
further observed that, exaggerated versions of incident are reflected in a large
criapln1434.25.odt 4 of 5
number of complaints. The tendency of over implication is also reflected in a
very large number of cases and it is high time that the legislature must take
into consideration the pragmatic realities and make suitable changes in
existing law. The keeping in mind aforesaid exposition of law coupled with
contents of FIR and charge-sheet, this Court finds that present case is another
example of over implication. The prosecution of Applicants in facts and
circumstances of the case would be abuse of process of law and wastage of
judicial time.
9. In result, case is made out to exercise inherent powers of this
Court to quash FIR and consequential proceeding pending against applicants.
Hence, following order:
ORDER
(i) Applications are allowed.
(ii) FIR dated 18.09.2023 in Crime No. 171/2023, registered with
Chopda (Rural) Police Station, District Jalgaon for offences punishable
under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 510 read with 34 of Indian Penal
Code as well as consequential proceeding in R.C.C. No. 229/2023
pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chopda is hereby
quashed and set aside.
(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.)
ssp
criapln1434.25.odt 5 of 5
