IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 172 OF 2022 1. Shaikh Juber S/o Shaikh Gaffur (Husband of Informant) 2. Shaikh Gaffur S/o Shaikh Chotu (Father-in-Law) 3. Shaikh Alim S/o Shaikh Gaffur (Brother-in-Law) 4. Shaikh Naim S/o Shaikh Gaffur (Brother-in-Law) 5. Shaikh Najim S/o Shaikh Gaffur (Brother-in-Law) 6. Shaikh Nafisabi W/o Alim Khan (Sister-in-law) 7. Shaikh Alim S/o Majid Khan Pathan (Husband of Petitioner No.6) 8. Sayyed Rukhyya W/o Abrar Ali (Sister-in-law) ……..……..Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. Shaikh Seema W/o Shaikh Juber (Informant) ……..… Respondents Mr. Shaikh Altmash h/f Mr. R.M. Shaikh, Advocate for the Applicants (through V.C.) Mr. A. R. Kale, APP for the Respondent/State Mr. Pathan. S. Khan, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED : 8th SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. After hearing learned Counsels for both sides and when this Court has shown its disinclination to grant relief to Petitioner No. 1/Husband of Informant, Learned Counsel for Petitioner, on instructions, seeks withdrawal of Petition qua this Petitioner No.1. In this view, proceedings stands dismissed Crim.Wp.172/2023.odt 1 of 8 2026:BHC-AUG:42308-DB as withdrawn against petitioner No.1. 2. This application filed under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 the present Applicants seek quashment FIR in Crime No. 0531/2021 register with City Chowk Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad for offence punishable u/s. 498-A, 323, 504, 506, r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code and under section 3, 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, so also seeks quashment of Chargesheet No. 20/2022 filed in RCC No. 257/2022 and Order dated 07/03/2022 for issuance of process passed by Ld. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Aurangabad. 3. It's the case of the prosecution that marriage of the Informant/Respondent No. 2 was solemnized with the Petitioner No.1- Husband (a Police Constable) on 15/01/2017 as per Muslim rites and customs, out of which a child was born. It's alleged that the family of the informant disbursed 5,50,000/- towards wedding expenses, household ₹ articles, and ornaments at the time of marriage. Shortly thereafter, the Petitioner No.1 along with the present petitioner Nos. 2 to 8 allegedly subjected the Informant to physical, mental, and emotional cruelty over trivial matters, forcing her into domestic labor and keeping her starved. The Petitioners unlawfully demanded a sum of 7,00,000/- to purchase a ₹ residential plot in Aurangabad and ousted her from the matrimonial home. Crim.Wp.172/2023.odt 2 of 8 Though the Informant’s father paid ₹3,00,000/- ( 1,50,000/- cash and ₹ ornaments worth 1,50,000/-) to partially satisfy the demand. It's further ₹ alleged that Petitioner Nos. 2 to 8 resumed ill-treating her, with the Petitioner No.1 frequently beating her using a police belt, shoes, and a stick, locking her inside the house, threatening her with his service rifle, and neglecting the basic medical needs of their minor child. 4. Following physical assaults, the Informant was forced to take shelter at her parental home on 02/04/2021. On 14/04/2021, the Petitioner No.1 allegedly arrived at her parental residence in police uniform carrying a stick, aggressively attempted to take the minor child, assaulted the informants father and brother when they attempted to mediate, and threatened to commit suicide after leaving a note falsely framing her family. Thereafter, Petitioner No.1 subsequently filed a false counter-complaint (N.C. No. 235/2021) against her relatives at City Chowk Police Station. The Informant, aggrieved by the persistent physical, mental, and financial torture spanning from 15/01/2017 to 14/04/2021, the present crime was lodged and Chargesheet came to be filed. 5. The learned council for the petitioners summit that this is a case of deliberate implication, so also there is delay of 7 months in lodging the first Crim.Wp.172/2023.odt 3 of 8 information report. To attract the allegations of petitioners physically and mentally harassing the Informant as alleged, the prosecution has to show that that is sufficient evidence on record in order to indicate that the informant has suffered physical and mental abuse at the instance of present Petitioners. He drew the attention of the court to the FIR and charge sheet on record to contend that the allegations against the applicant are vague and on bases of such omnibus and vague allegations the applicant cannot be tried. It is further submitted that the informant in order to cause harassment have filed multiple proceedings and reports against Petitioners, so also proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights was filed by the Petitioner No.1 which shows his genuinity to peacefully reside with informant. He further submits that it cannot be said that elements of the offence alleged against the present applicants are fulfilled. 6. Learned APP and Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2 submits that the application for quashing deserves to be dismissed, as the FIR clearly shows prima facie case of cruelty under Section 498A of IPC being made out so also perusal of investigation papers clearly show unlawful demands of dowry being made. The attention of the court is drawn to evidence on record to contend that there are multiple proceedings filed against present Petitioner Crim.Wp.172/2023.odt 4 of 8 No.1 which shows the genuinity of proceedings and complicity of the Present Petitioners in causing the acts alleged against them. It is further argued that claim of some Petitioners living separately does not exonerate them from the offence, as they actively acted together causing cruelty, so also the statements of witnesses recorded indicate harassment caused are sufficient to implicate the present Petitioners for offence alleged. 7. It is undisputed fact that the marriage between informant/Respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1 was solemnized on 15/01/2017 as per Muslim rites and customs and a child is born out of the said wedlock. The respondent No.2 along with her child left matrimonial Home on 02/04/2021 and started residing with her parents. Thereafter, on 03/11/2021, informant/Respondent No.2 registered a FIR against the present Petitioners. Thus, this indicates that there is a crack in conjugal bond between respondent No. 2, and Petitioner No.1-Husband, so also there is a rift in familial relations between Informant and Petitioner Nos.2 to 8 some time after solemnisation of marriage of Respondent No.2 and Petitioner No.1 and it's further evident from the record that for period of 7 months prior to lodging of report, the Respondent No.2 is residing separately. 8. Prima facie perusal of the record shows that all of the petitioner Nos. 2 Crim.Wp.172/2023.odt 5 of 8 to 8 are residing separately distant from the matrimonial home of Respondent No.2 and there are no specific, but generalized, and omnibus allegations against them of causing mental and physical harassment, instigating the Petitioner No.1, so also demand dowry from the Respondent No. 2 when they visited matrimonial home. 9. At this stage, it would be relevant to refer to the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Geeta Mehrotra v. State of U.P., (2012) 10 SCC 741, Preeti Gupta & Anr. v. State of Jharkhand, (2010) 7 SCC 667, Kahkashan Kausar v. State of Bihar, (2022) 6 SCC 599 which states that relatives which are residing separately cannot be forced to face trial under Section 498A of IPC based on vague and sweeping allegations. 10. In so far as statements of witnesses recorded are concerned, the same is not sufficient to implicate the petitioners and hold them culpable for acts alleged. The allegations made against the present petitioners are purely Omnibus and the same cannot sustain as they lack specific overt acts and in absence of evidence of physical and mental cruelty being caused to the Respondent No.2., they cannot be made to face rigours of trial. 11. It is well-settled that a criminal prosecution under Section 498A of the Crim.Wp.172/2023.odt 6 of 8 IPC cannot be sustained against family members on the basis of general and uncorroborated assertions without concrete details regarding time, place, and individual participation. 12. Bare perusal of the investigation papers indicate that present petitioners are brought into sweep of this crime in order to cause harassment and distress. Prima facie this Court is of the view that involvement of the present petitioners is done with malafide intentions only because they are related to Petitioner No.1/Husband of the informant. On the basis of such allegations, if the present Applicants are called upon to undergo rigors of trial, it would lead to miscarriage of Justice. Therefore, the aforesaid accusations, even if taken at face value and accepted in their entirety, do not constitute any offence. 13. It is evident from the above discussion, that the applicants being relatives of the Applicant No.1/Husband have been roped in under Section 498A IPC without specific allegations, purely to settle personal scores. Allowing such proceedings to continue would amount to abuse of the court process. Consequently, the FIR and consequential proceedings against the Petitioners are liable to be quashed and set aside. 14. In view of above, application qua Applicant No. 2 to 8 stands allowed in terms of prayer clauses “B”, “B-A” and “B-B”. Crim.Wp.172/2023.odt 7 of 8 ( R. M. JOSHI, J.) Malani Crim.Wp.172/2023.odt 8 of 8