Madhya Pradesh High Court
Abhishek Tyagi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 3 October, 2023
Author: Vivek Rusia
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
ON THE 3rd OF OCTOBER, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 30006 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
ABHISHEK TYAGI S/O SHRI VIRENDRA TYAGI, AGED ABOUT 32
YEARS, OCCUPATION: MAJOR IN INDIAN ARMY, PERMANENT
1.
REISDENT 2/34, CHRANJEEV VIHAR, POST AND POLICE STATION
KAVINAGAR, GHAZIABAD (UTTAR PRADESH)
VIRENDRA TYAGI S/O LATE SHRI RAJARAM, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
2. OCCUPATION: RETIRED, R/O 2/34, CHRANJEEV VIHAR, POST AND
POLICE STATION KAVINAGAR, GHAZIABAD (UTTAR PRADESH)
SMT. NIRMAL TYAGI W/O SHRI VIRENDRA TYAGI, AGED ABOUT 68
YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE, R/O 2/34, CHRANJEEV VIHAR,
3.
POST AND POLICE STATION KAVINAGAR, GHAZIABAD (UTTAR
PRADESH)
SHIKSHA TYAGI D/O SHRI VIRENDRA TYAGI, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
4. OCCUPATION: SERVICE, R/O 2/34, CHRANJEEV VIHAR, POST AND
POLICE STATION KAVINAGAR, GHAZIABAD (UTTAR PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(SHRI VINAY PURANIK, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPLICANT.)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE OFFICER
1. THROUGH POLICE STATION MHOW, DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
SMT. POOJA PANT TYAGI W/O SHRI ABHISHEK TYAGI, AGED ABOUT
2. 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE, R/O 66, TRIMURTI NAGAR,
SAROJNI NAGAR PHASE-I, LUCKNOW (UTTAR PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI GAURAV SINGH CHOUHAN, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR THE
RESPONDENT NO.1 / STATE.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DIVYANSH
SHUKLA
Signing time: 04-10-2023
16:08:18
-2-
NONE PRESENT FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.2.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This application coming on for orders this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
[1] The applicants have filed present petition under Section 482
of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashment of charges
framed under Section 498-A/34, 294, 506 Part-II of IPC by learned
JMFC. Although, against the charges framed by the learned JMFC a
revision lies but the Apex Court in case of Vijay and another v/s State of
Maharashtra and another reported in AIR 2017 (Supreme Court) 397
has held that the relief under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be granted
despite availability of the alternate remedy.
[2] The marriage of applicant No.1 and respondent No.2 was
solemnized on 18.11.2015, it was inter-caste love marriage with the
consent of their parents. The applicant No.1 is working as Major in
Indian Army and due to which he used to be posted at different
locations. During posting at Firozpur he found change in the behavior of
respondent No.2, she started fighting with him on petty issues. In the
year 2017, he was transferred from Firozpur to Arunachal Pradesh and
again a dispute arose between them. Thereafter, the applicant No.1 was
transferred to Mhow District Indore in the month of January 2019 and
the respondent No.2 came with him but refused to shift to Mhow.
[3] According to the applicant No.1, the respondent No.2 made
a complaint to the police which was registered as NCR No.438/2019
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DIVYANSH
SHUKLA
Signing time: 04-10-2023
16:08:18
under Section 323 and 504 of IPC in respect of assault on 08.08.2019, at
that time no allegations were made against the applicants No.2 to 4.
According to the applicant No.1, he made a complaint against
respondent No.2 alleging loot in his house to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-
by respondent No.2. The applicant No.1 has also filed a petition under
Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce from
respondent No.2 on 13.09.2019 at Family Court Ghaziabad, thereafter,
she has filed a reply.
[4] As a counterblast, respondent No.2 lodged an FIR against
the applicants No.1 to 4 on 09.08.2019 that she is subjected to cruelty
from 18.11.2015 to 15.06.2019. After completing the investigation, the
police filed a charge-sheet on 15.11.2019 under Section 498-A, 294,
506, 34 of IPC on the basis of omnibus allegations leveled by the
respondent No.2.
[5] According to the applicant No.1, the applicants No.2 to 4
never shifted to Mhow. The allegations of assault by applicants No.2 to
4 are in respect of February 2017 during posting of applicant No.1 in
Tawang, Arunachal Pradesh, at that time, respondent No.2 came to
Ghaziabad and there she was subjected to cruelty by applicants No.2 to
[6] In view of the above, the complaint against applicants No.2
to 4 at police station Mhow is not maintainable. The allegation of assault
is only against applicant No.1 and that too on 08.08.2019 at 09:00,
therefore, such a complaint is nothing but a misuse of process of law.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DIVYANSH
SHUKLA
Signing time: 04-10-2023
16:08:18
The applicants No.2 to 4 are unnecessarily being harassed in order to
settle the matrimonial dispute with applicant No.1.
[7] The Apex Court in case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam &
Ors Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No.195/2022) has held
that this court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the
misuse of Section 498-A IPC and the increased tendency of implicating
relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes, without analyzing 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.
[8] With the aforesaid, Misc. Criminal Case is allowed in part,
the charges framed against qua applicant No.2-Virendra Tyagi, applicant
No.3-Smt. Nirmal Tyagi and applicant No.4-Shiksha Tyagi are hereby
quashed. The proceedings pending against the applicant No.1-husband
shall remain continue.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
JUDGE
Divyansh
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: DIVYANSH
SHUKLA
Signing time: 04-10-2023
16:08:18
