75-APL-951-2025 (CR).doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 951 OF 2025 Ramakant Laxman Gawade .....Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .....Respondents ..... Mr. Rahul R Patil, for the Applicant. Mr. Avinash Naik, A.P.P., for the Respondent-State. ..... CORAM: SANDESH D. PATIL, J. DATED: 2nd JULY 2026. P. C. : 1. By the present Application, the Applicant is seeking quashing of F.I.R. bearing C.R. No.28 of 2025 lodged at the instance of Chandgad Police Station, District Kolhapur and Chargesheet No.95 of 2025 filed before Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandgad, District Kolhapur on 29th January, 2025 for offences punishable under Sections 74, 75(2), 333, 351(2) and 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 along with all the consequential proceedings pending thereof. The case of the Complainant is that the Complainant was residing along with her daughter. Her husband was working in Army posted in Gujarat. The Manisha 1 75-APL-951-2025 (CR).doc Complainant’s younger sister had dispute with her husband-present Applicant. It is submitted that the husband of the first informant came home on 28th January, 2025 at 4:00 p.m.. At that time, the Applicant committed the offence which is stated in the F.I.R. 2. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the F.I.R. deserves to be quashed because it is filed malafidely. He submits that there is admittedly a dispute between the sister of the Complainant and the present Applicant and that the F.I.R. is filed with oblique motive. The learned Counsel for the Applicant does not raise any other ground other than this 3. Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant. I have also perused the copy of the F.I.R. along with the chargesheet. At this stage, it will be very difficult to reach to a conclusion that the F.I.R. is lodged with a oblique motive. The averments in the F.I.R. coupled with the statements of the witnesses which were recorded do not permit to make out any such an inference at this stage. It would not be safe to say that only because dispute is pending between the parties therefore, the offences which are serious in nature have been committed upon the Manisha 2 75-APL-951-2025 (CR).doc Complainant by the Applicant. In this circumstance, at this stage, no interference is required in this Application. 4. In view of above, Criminal Application No.951 of 2025 is dismissed. (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) Manisha 3