Gujarat High Court
Kailashbhai Nandlal Rathi vs State Of Gujarat on 4 August, 2023
Bench: M. R. Mengdey
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5175/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/08/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 5175 of 2014
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed No
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy No
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question No
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
KAILASHBHAI NANDLAL RATHI & 1 other(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANKIT Y BACHANI(5424) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR YH VYAS(1001) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS. VRUNDA C. SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 04/08/2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. By filing the present Application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Applicants have prayed to quash and set aside
the FIR being I-CR No. 12 of 2014 registered with North Deesa City Police
Station, District Banaskantha for the offences punishable under
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5175/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/08/2023
undefined
Sections498(A), 323, 504, 506(2) read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal
Code.
2. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Ankit Y. Bachani for the Applicants. He
submitted that the Applicants herein are the brother-in-law and sister-in-law
(Nadoi & Nanand respectively) of the Respondent No.2 - first informant. The
first informant was staying at her parental house at Deesa whereas the present
Applicants were staying at Vapi separately. On no occasion, the present
Applicants have resided with Respondent No.2 - first informant under the same
roof. He also submitted that the allegations levelled against the present
Applicants in the FIR are vague and general in nature. He therefore submitted
to allow the present Application and quash and set aside the FIR in question as
regards the present Applicants. Learned Advocate for the Applicants has relied
upon the judgment of this Court in Special Criminal Application No. 9774 of
2019 in the case of Manishaben Dharmeshbhai Bambhniya v/s Poonamben
Hardikhbhai Sosa decided on 22.12.2021 in support of his submissions.
3. The Application is opposed by learned APP Ms. Vrunda C. Shah
appearing for the Respondent - State. She submitted that there is a clear
allegations against the present Applicants in the FIR to the effect that the
Applicants herein had asked Respondent No.2 - first informant to bring money
from her parental house by selling the house of her father and repay the debt of
the brother of Applicant No.2. Thus, there are clear allegations of demand of
dowry and physical and mental harassment on the hands of the present
Applicants. She therefore submitted to dismiss the present Application.
4. Learned Advocate Mr. Y.H.Vyas appearing for Respondent No.2 has
also opposed the present Application.
5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the record.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5175/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/08/2023
undefined
6. The present Applicants happen to be the brother-in-law and sister-in-law
of Respondent No.2 - first informant. The Applicant No.2 happens to be the
Nanand of Respondent who is married to the Applicant No.1 and was staying
at her matrimonial house along with Applicant No.1 at Vapi. The only
allegation levelled against the present Applicants in the FIR is to the effect that
on 26.1.2014 the Applicants herein had gone to the house of Respondent No.2
and asked her to dispose of the house of her father and repay the debt of her
husband i.e. brother of Applicant No.2. The Respondent No.2 had denied such
proposal, upon which, all the accused persons including the present Applicants
got agitated and started abusing her and also gave her kick and fist blows. The
alleged incident has taken place on 26.1.2014 whereas the FIR in question has
been lodged on 1.2.2014. There is no dispute as regards the fact that both the
present Applicants were residing at Vapi at the time of incident whereas the
Respondent No.2 was residing at Deesa which is quite at a distance from the
place of the present Applicants. The allegations levelled against the present
Applicants in the present FIR, as discussed herein above, are general in nature.
Merely because Respondent No.2 was asked by the present Applicants to
dispose of the house belonging to her father and to pay the debt of her husband,
by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be a demand of dowry or physical
or mental torture. Upon perusal of FIR, it also appears that the Respondent -
first informant has implicated all the members of the family as accused in the
FIR though no specific overt act has been attributed to any of the accused
persons. Thus, the present is a case of over implication.
7. In view of the aforesaid, the present FIR appears to be nothing but an
abuse of process of law so far as the present Applicants are concerned, and
hence, there is no point in keeping the present proceedings pending against the
present Applicants. The present Application therefore deserves to be allowed.
8. Under the circumstances, the present Application is allowed. The FIR
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/5175/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/08/2023
undefined
being C.R.No. I - 12/2014 registered with North Deesa City Police Station and
all other consequential proceedings arising there from are hereby quashed and
set aside so far as it relates to the present Applicant. Rule is made absolute.
Direct service is permitted.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
J.N.W
