[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Amjad Khan S/O Chote Miyan Khan And ... vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Wani Yavatmal ... on 19 January, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:1102-DB
117 apl 132.21.odt..odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 132 OF 2021
1. Mr. Amjad Khan s/o Chote Miyan
Khan
Aged about 40 years,
Occupation : Service
R/o House No.12/189, Ward No.12,
Faij Nagar, Talapara,
Police Station: Civil Lines, Dist;
Bilaspur, Chattisgarh
2. Mrs. Sajeda Begum wd/o Chote
Miyan Khan
Aged about: 61 years,
Occupation: Housewife,
R/o House No.12/189, Ward No.12,
Faij Nagar, Talapara,
Police Station : Civil Lines,
Dist. Bilaspur, Chattisgarh APPLICANTS
// V E R S U S //
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Wani Police Station Wani
Yavatmal
2. Mrs. Farha Amjad Khan
Aged about 31 years,
Occ:- Housewife,
c/o Sohel Patel,
Taj Engineering,
Virani Talkies Road, Tilak Chowk, NON-APPLICANTS
Wani, District Yavatmal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. M.R. Mishra Advocate for the applicants.
Mr. H.D. Dubey, APP for non-applicant No.1/State.
Ms Diksha Rohankar, Advocate h/f Mr. D.N. Mudgale, Advocate for non-applicant
No.2.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
117 apl 132.21.odt..odt
2
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.
DATED : 19.01.2026
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Heard.
2. ADMIT. Taken up for final disposal with the consent
of learned counsel for the parties.
3. The present application is preferred by the applicants
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Prosecution for
quashing of the First Information Report in connection with crime
No.1079/2019 registered at Police Station Wani District Yavatmal
for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 34 of the
IPC and charge-sheet No.153/2020 and consequent proceeding
arising out of same bearing RCC No.198/2020 pending before the
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Wani, Yavatmal.
4. Crime is registered on the basis of the report lodged
by non-applicant No.2 on an allegation that her marriage with the
applicant No.1 was performed in the year 2018. After marriage
she resumed the cohabitation. She is having one son from the said
117 apl 132.21.odt..odt
wedlock but applicant No.1 was suspecting her character and was
abusing and assaulting her on that count. He was demanding Rs.2
lakhs from her parents for purchasing the vehicle. Therefore, she
constrained to leave the matrimonial house. On the basis of said
report, police have registered the crime against the present
applicants.
5. Heard learned counsel for the applicants who
submitted that as there was a dispute between husband and wife
this FIR came to be lodged. There are no specific instances are
narrated as far as ill treatment at the hands of the applicants are
concerned. He submitted that considering the nature of the
allegations levelled against the present applicants the application
deserves to be allowed.
6. Per contra learned counsel for the APP and learned
counsel for the complainant strongly opposed for the same and
submitted that there is specific instances narrated by the
complainant as far as the role of the applicant No.1 is concerned.
In view of that application deserves to be rejected.
117 apl 132.21.odt..odt
7. On hearing both the sides and on perusal of the
investigation papers it reveals that allegation levelled against
applicant No.1 is that he was addicted to bad habits and under
the influence of liquor he was suspecting her character and
subjected her for ill treatment. Thus, specific instances are
levelled against the present applicant is concerned. But as far as
applicant No.2 is concerned, general and omnibus allegations are
levelled against him. It is apparent that she is implicated merely
because she is the mother of the applicant No.1. As far as the
offence under Section 498-A of the IPC is concerned, there should
be harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a
view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any
unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on
account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such
demand.
8. In the light of the requirement if the facts of the
present case are taken into consideration there is prima-facie case
made out against the applicant No.1 is concerned. Applicant No.2
against whom no prima-facie case is made out. Therefore
application deserves to be allowed partly.
117 apl 132.21.odt..odt
9. In view of that, I proceed to pass following the order:-
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Application is allowed partly.
(ii) First Information Report in connection with
crime No.1079/2019 registered at Police Station Wani
District Yavatmal for the offences punishable under Sections
498-A and 34 of the IPC and charge-sheet No.153/2020 and
consequent proceeding arising out of same bearing RCC
No.198/2020 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Wani, Yavatmal are hereby quashed and set aside
to the extent of applicant No.2- Mrs. Sajeda Begum wd/o
Chote Miyan Khan.
(iii) The prayer of the applicant No.1 for quashing of
the FIR is hereby rejected.
10. Criminal Application stands disposed of in the above
terms.
( URMILA JOSHI PHALKE, J.)
manisha
Signed by: Mrs. Manisha Shewale
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 23/01/2026 10:56:15
