Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mohammad Ashiq vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:21582
1 CRR-2254-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2254 of 2024
MOHAMMAD ASHIQ AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Vivek Singh -Senior Advocate with Shri Rajesh Yadav-
Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Hemant Sharma - G.A appearing on behalf of Advocate
General.
Shri Dilip Kumar Saxena - Advocate for the respondent/
Objector.
(Heard on 25.07.2025)
(Delivered on 11.08.2025)
ORDER
This criminal revision under section 397 read with section 401 of the
Cr.P.C., 1973 is preferred being aggrieved by order dated 12.03.2024 in ST
No.60/2024 by X Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain whereby charges under
sections 294, 323, 377, 498-A, read with section 34 of the IPC & Section 4
of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 have been
framed against revision petitioner no.1 and charges under sections 294, 323
r/w 34, 498-A of the IPC have been framed against rest of the revision
petitioners.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:21582
2 CRR-2254-2024
2. Facts of the case in brief are that marriage of prosecutrix with
revision petitioner no.1 Mohd. Ashik was solemnized on 29.11.2010 as per
the Muslim Law. After the marriage she was subjected to cruelty and
unnatural sex was committed by revision petitioner no.1 despite her
resistance. On resistance she was subjected to filthy language. In the night of
1.10.2023 at about 10 p.m. also she was subjected to unnatural sex despite
her resistance. When she objected then revision petitioner no.1/ husband
divorced her by pronouncing talaak thrice and she was thrown out of the
house. She went to her paternal home and intimated the incident to his
brother and father and lodged a report on 15.12.2023 at Police Station
Mahakaal District Ujjain and a crime no.653/2023 was registered and final
report was submitted against revision petitioner no.1. After completion of
investigation, final report was submitted under section 294, 323, 376, 498-A
and section 34 of the IPC and Section 4 of Muslim Women (Protection of
Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 against rest of the revision petitioners before
JMFC Ujjain on 22.03.2024 where a criminal case no.893/2024 was
registered and vide order dated 15.03.2024 case was committed to the court
of Sessions Judge, Ujjain. Charges were framed against revision petitioners
as mentioned in para-1 of the judgment.
3. Challenging the illegality, this criminal revision was preferred on
the ground that revision petitioners no.2 and 3 were not named in the First
Information Report registered by the complainant. Revision petitioner no.2 is
major and wife of petitioner no.1, accordingly charges under section 377 of
the IPC cannot be framed. The petitioners relied in the case of Kuldeep Singh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:21582
3 CRR-2254-2024
Vs. State of Punjab and other (2025) SCC Online SC 211 and Umang
Singhar Vs. State of M.P. (2023) SCC Online MP 3221: (2023) 251 AIC
4. Heard.
5. Counsel for the respondent/State opposes the criminal revision.
6. Victim No.2 represented by counsel opposes the revision petition by
filing the reply through IA No.19146/2024. She filed the documents which
relates to the complaint preferred by respondent no.2 to Ministry of Home
Affairs and copy of Domestic Incident Report and the copy of the complaint
under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,
2005 seeking various reliefs under the Act.
7. Perused the record.
8. The allegations in the FIR and in the statements recorded under
section 161 of the Cr.P.C, 1973 and final report submitted reveals that act of
committing unnatural sex was prior to the pronouncement of talaak. In the
light of Umang Singhar Vs. State of M.P. (2023) SCC Online MP 3221:
(2023) 251 AIC 457 and Banty Jatav Vs. State of M.P. (2025) SCC Online
MP 4007, head no.3 of charge framed against revision petitioner no.1 under
section 377 of the IPC does not sustain but committing unnatural sex with
wife against her wishes and on her resistance, assaulting and treating her
with physical cruelty will fall under the definition of cruelty.
9. The allegation against the revision petitioner no.2 and 3 also justify
the framing of charge under section 294, 323 read with section 34 and 498-A
of the IPC. In the light of the above the criminal revision is partly allowed
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:21582
4 CRR-2254-2024
and head no.3 of charges framed against the revision petitioner no.1 under
section 377 of the IPC is quashed and trial against the revision petitioners
will continue in rest of the charges.
10. With the aforesaid, criminal revision is disposed off.
(GAJENDRA SINGH)
JUDGE
ajit
