1 8-J-APL-272-2021.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 272 OF 2021 APPLICANTS : 1. Prakash s/o Laximan Ingle (Husband of complainant ) Aged about 36 years, Occu. Labourer. (Mother-in-law of 2. Shalini W/o Laximan Ingle, complainant ) Aged about 60 years, Occ. Household. (Father-in-law of 3. Laximan S/o Vitthal Ingle, the complainant ) Aged about 65 yeas, Occu. Agriculturist No.1 to 3 All R/o Chattrapati Shivaji Nagar Chikhali Bk. Tq. Distt. Washim No Relation between 4. Harshwardhan S/o Trambak Navghare, either complainant or Aged about 26 years, Occu. Agriculturist Applicant No.1) R/o Gaundhala, Tq. Risod, Distt. Washim Mob. No. 9850183859. V E R S U S RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Officer, Balapur, Tq. Balpur, Distt. Akola. (Wife of Applicant No.1) 2. Sau. Sarita W/o Prakash Ingle, Aged about 33 Yrs., Occu. Beauty Parlor, C/o Baburao S/o Kundlik Wankhede, R/o Kolsa, Tq. Balapur, Distt. Akola. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms. Gulafshan Ansari, Advocate h/f Shri Raju Kadu, Advocate for applicants. Shri A. M. Kadukar, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM: URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J. DATED : 17/02/2026. ORAL JUDGMENT : 2026:BHC-NAG:2953-DB 2 8-J-APL-272-2021.doc 1. Heard. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. By this application, the applicants are seeking quashing of the FIR in connection with Crime No.776/2020 registered under Section 498-A R/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. A crime is registered on the basis of report lodged by the non-applicant No.2 on an allegation that her marriage with applicant No.1 was performed and after marriage, she resumed cohabitation at the house of present applicants. She is having two daughters from the said wedlock. However, last 7 to 8 months of the lodging of the FIR, she was subjected for ill-treatment at the hands of applicant Nos.2 and 3 who are the in-laws, as she has begotten the daughters. It is alleged by her that they were instigating her husband and they were also demanding amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from her parents. On the basis of said report, police have registered a crime against the present applicants. 4. Heard learned counsel for the applicants who submitted that on the basis of general, omnibus and vague allegations, applicants are implicated in the alleged offence. She submitted that in fact, the marriage is already dissolved by decree 3 8-J-APL-272-2021.doc of divorce on 04/10/2023. Thus, merely because the applicants have filed matrimonial petitions and to give a counterblast to the said matrimonial petitions, this FIR came to be lodged against the present applicants. She submitted that as far as applicant No.4 is concerned, who is not within the definition of relative. Then also he is implicated in the alleged offence. She invited my attention towards the recitals of the FIR and submitted that by no stretch of imagination, the recitals of the FIR attract the offence punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC and for all the above reasons, application deserves to be allowed. 5. Per contra, learned APP strongly opposed the said contention and submitted that there is specific allegations as far as applicant Nos.2 and 3 are concerned and therefore, the application deserves to be rejected. 6. Despite the service of notice, none appears for the non- applicant No.2. 7. On going through the investigation papers especially, from the recitals of the FIR, it reveals that the marriage between the present applicant No.1 and non-applicant No.2 was performed on 04/05/2007 and thereafter, there was no complaint till the 4 8-J-APL-272-2021.doc filing of the FIR i.e. on 20/10/2020. It is further apparent that on 20/10/2020, one NC was filed by the present applicant No.1 alleging that his wife is not residing with the aunt frequently going to her parents house and he was threatened by his in-laws also. On the basis of said NC report, the NC report No.74/2020 was registered and subsequent to this NCR report, this FIR came to be lodged. On perusal of the recitals of the FIR, it seems that the general, omnibus and vague allegations are levelled against the present applicants without mentioning the details regrading the exact demand when it was started and when the ill-treatment was started. On the basis of general, omnibus and vague allegations, the applicants implicated in the alleged offence. It is now well settled that on the basis of the general, omnibus and vague allegations without specifying any date and time, the relatives of the husband should not be implicated in such type of matrimonial offences. Even accepting the allegations as it is, no offence is made out if we consider the requirements which are given under Section 498-A of the IPC. Section 498-A of the IPC reads as under :- “498-A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty. Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.” 5 8-J-APL-272-2021.doc The explanation :- For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means- (a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or (b) 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. There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing section 498-A in the Indian Penal Code was to prevent the torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498-A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. 9. In any event, the wilful act or conduct ought to be the proximate cause in order to bring home the charge under Section 498-A and by applying the same principles to the facts of the present case, admittedly, no specific instances are narrated as far as demand is concerned or ill-treatment at the hands of present applicants. There is no specific allegations that what type of ill- 6 8-J-APL-272-2021.doc treatment was there at the hands of the present applicants. On the contrary, it is apparent that as matrimonial proceedings are filed by the applicant No.1, he has also filed NC report and therefore, to give a counterblast to the said NC report, this FIR came to be lodged. 10. Considering all above aspects and by applying parameters laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors., 1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335, wherein following principles / guidelines are laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court :- “(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. 7 8-J-APL-272-2021.doc (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 11. The prima facie case is not made out against the present applicants. In view of that, application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass following order :- ORDER i] The application is allowed. ii] The FIR in connection with Crime No.776/2020 registered under Section 498-A R/w Section 34 of the IPC is hereby quashed and set aside to the extent of the present applicants. 12. The application is disposed of. [JUDGE] Choulwar