IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3993 OF 2023 1. Gaurav s/o Sharad Naleshwarkar 2. Shailaja s/o Sharad Naleshwarkar ...Applicants VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. Tanvi d/o Sanjay Nyayadhish ...Respondents ... Mr. V. S. Wakale, Advocate for Applicants Party-in-person, for Respondent No.2 Mr. N. R. Dayama, APP for Respondent – State ... CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 21st AUGUST, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. After hearing Learned Counsel for Applicants as well as Respondent-in-person and when this court has shown disinclination to grant relief to Applicant No. 1- husband, learned Counsel for Applicants, on instructions, seeks withdrawal of the application qua Applicant No. 1. Thus, application qua Applicant No. 1 stands dismissed as withdrawn leaving the present adjudication confined solely to the remaining Applicant No. 2. 2. By this Application, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”), the Applicant No. 2 APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt 1 of 7 2026:BHC-AUG:38748-DB seeks quashment of the proceedings pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), Aurangabad bearing RCC No. 1014/2023 arising out of First Information Report (FIR) bearing Crime No. 028/2022 dated 02.02.2022, registered at Osmanpura Police Station, District Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”) and under Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and subsequently Section 406 of IPC came to be added against the Applicants. 3. The aforesaid First Information Report was lodged by the Respondent No. 2 against her husband (Applicant No.1) and her mother-in law (Applicant No. 2). The marriage of the Applicant No.1 and the Respondent No. 2 was solemnized on 25.04.2018 at Aurangabad according to Hindu rites and customs. Applicants made the Respondent No.2 to secure loan for buying a house at Pune and demanded money from the father of the respondent No. 2 for the furniture required for the said house. Thereafter, when the Respondent No. 2 could not fulfill some demands, the Applicants subjected her to physical assault causing hurt, verbal and financial abuse and mental cruelty. On the basis of these allegations, FIR was registered on 02.02.2022 and thereafter, on 10.05.2022 the APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt 2 of 7 chargesheet came to be filed, process has been issued against the Applicants, so also Charges were framed on 19.12.2022. 4. Learned Counsel for Applicant submits that the First Information Report is lodged on basis of false and concocted story, which amounts to abuse of the process of law. It is further submitted that the allegations lack basis, particularly when Applicants No. 2 and her Husband resided separately in rented premises because her husband was suffering from cancer. Learned Counsel points out that the specific allegation of forcing the Respondent No. 2 to secure loan is completely twisted and submits that it was Respondent No. 2 who wanted to purchase the flat and insisted the Applicants even after their denial due to financial incapacity of the Applicant No. 1. Thereafter, the Respondent No. 2 requested them to pay the consideration amount and stated that she will pay the installments from her salary. He submits that for the happiness of the Respondent No. 2, Applicant No. 2 and her husband paid 16 Lakhs to the builder and purchased 3 Lakhs for the furniture, this fact is admitted by the Respondent No. 2 in her Application under Domestic Violence Act, before Learned JMFC, Aurangabad. APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt 3 of 7 5. Learned Counsel for the Applicant further submits that when the Applicant No. 2 came to Pune for the treatment of her husband, Respondent No. 2 had not permitted Applicant No.2 and her deceased husband to reside in the premises where the Applicant No. 1 and the Respondent No. 2 were residing. Therefore, Applicants rented a room and it was not possible for Applicant No. 1 to leave Applicant No. 2 and his father in such condition. He further submits that the allegations made in the FIR in relation to the hurt caused to the Respondent No.2 by the Applicants are nowhere to be seen in her earlier complaints before JMFC or proceedings filed before the Women Cell. Moreover, the allegation against Applicant No. 2 in relation to the possession of the Stridhan are completely false since the Respondent No. 2 being a working woman the ornaments were kept in locker, thereafter the Applicant has duly received her Stridhan as has been admitted by her. Therefore, the allegations under Section 406 IPC would not be attracted. Lastly, he submits that the FIR lacks specific allegations and it is lodged with malafide intention to harass the Applicants and thus the continuance of proceedings pending before the Learned Magistrate would amount to abuse of process of law. APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt 4 of 7 6. Learned APP and Party-in-person/Respondent No. 2 submits that the application for quashing deserves dismissal, as the FIR clearly shows prima facie case of cruelty and illegal dowry demands under Section 498-A of the IPC. They strongly oppose grant of any relief to the present Applicants in view of the seriousness of the offence. 7. The Respondent No. 2 appearing as Party-in-person empathetically submits that during her marriage with Applicant No. 1, her parents provided gold ornaments alongside household items. Following the marriage, the couple relocated to Pune in a rented premise, where she paid a monthly rent. It is alleged that during this cohabitation, Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 along with his late father subjected the Respondent No.2 to persistent physical assault and verbal taunts, so also the Applicant No. 2 unlawfully retained the Stridhan of Respondent No. 2. It is further argued that to purchase a residential flat in Pune, she was compelled to pay booking amount and forced to secure a home loan. She further submits that Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 continuously pressured her to fetch funds from her father to furnish the premises, threatening her with divorce. APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt 5 of 7 8. Bare perusal of the investigation papers shows that there is no sufficient material on record to establish that the Applicant No. 2 has caused cruelty and hurt to the Respondent No.2. The record indicates that the Applicant No.2 resides separately distant from matrimonial home, even though they were residing together at earlier point of time, there are no specific allegations against Applicant No. 2 of causing harassment to the Respondent No.2. Moreover, as far as the allegations under section 406 of IPC are concerned, the Respondent No. 2 has admitted that she has duly received her Stridhan. This Court also finds substance in the contention of the Counsel for Applicant that the contribution of the Respondent No. 2 who was earning member of family, for purchase of the flat or payment of E.M.I. per se would not constitute demand of dowry and offence under penal law. 9. At this point, reference can be made to the judgments of the Hon’able Supreme Court in case of Anand Kumar Mohatta vs State (NCT of Delhi), 2019 11 SCC 706, State of Haryana vs Bhajan Lal, (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335, Sanjay Kumar Rai vs State of Uttar Pradesh, (2021) SCC OnLine Sc 367 wherein observations are made with regards to quashment of first information report and proceedings even after Charges are framed, if the trial continues, it APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt 6 of 7 would amount to abuse of process of court. Therefore, to prevent unwarranted harassment arising from matrimonial discord, the application deserves to be allowed qua Applicant No. 2. 10. In view of above, application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses ‘B’ and ‘B1’ to the extent of Applicant No. 2. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) Umesh APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt 7 of 7