943 APL-1071-2023 & APL-850-2023 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.1071 OF 2023 [Ayasha Bee Mohammad Yusuf Sheikh and Others ..Vs.. State of Maharashtra and Another] WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.850 OF 2023 [Sheikh Jouhar Arafat Wakeel Ahmad ..Vs.. State of Maharashtra and Another] ___________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders. Mr S. W. Sambre, Advocate for Applicants. Ms S. S. Dhote, Addl. P. P. for Non-Applicant/State. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 14 th NOVEMBER, 2025. . Heard finally by consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties. 2. The present applications are preferred by the applicants under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the First Information Report in connection with Crime No.164 of 2023 registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 506(2) and 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The applicant No.1 in criminal application No.1071 of 2023 is grandmother of the husband of the complainant whereas, applicant Nos.2 and 3 are the uncle and aunt respectively and applicant No.4 is also an uncle. Whereas, the applicant in criminal application No.850 of 2023 is brother-in-law. 2025:BHC-NAG:12124-DB 943 APL-1071-2023 & APL-850-2023 2 4. The applicants are arraigned as an accused on the basis of a report lodged by the informant on an allegation that she got married with one Amir Sohail Khan on 17.12.2021. After marriage, she resumed cohabitation at the matrimonial house alongwith her husband and all the applicants as well as her in-laws. It is alleged that after few months of marriage, the applicant in application No.850 of 2023, namely Sheikh Jouhar Arafat Wakeel Ahmad, who is her brother-in-law, allegedly used to enter her room and outrage her modesty on various occasions. Though, she disclosed the said incident, the applicants in application No.1071 of 2023, ignored them and didn’t take any action. On the contrary, she was beaten by them. It is further alleged by her that her husband used to demand amount of Rs.1,50,000/- from her parents and on that count also, she was ill-treated by all the family members. On the basis of the said report, police have registered the crime against the present applicants. 5. Heard learned counsel for the applicants who submitted that the entire allegations levelled against the present applicants are false, baseless and omnibus. No specific instances are narrated. General allegations are levelled. As far as the applicant in application No.850 of 2023 is concerned, who at the relevant time, was studying in Bangalore. Therefore, there was no occasion for him entered into the room of the informant and outraged her modesty. He submitted that even accepting the allegations at it is, it nowhere shows that with sexual intent, the applicant - brother-in-law entered her room and hold her hand. Except holding her hand, there is no further 943 APL-1071-2023 & APL-850-2023 3 allegation as far as the outraging the modesty is concerned. He submitted that as far as the present applicants are concerned, there are general and omnibus allegations; merely because they are relatives of the husband. The First Information Report was lodged after a delay and no explanation has been put forth for the same. In view of that the applications deserve to be allowed. 6. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly opposed for the same and submitted that considering the nature of the allegations levelled against the brother-in-law prima facie case is made out and therefore, his application deserves to be rejected. She submitted that as far as the other applicants are concerned, admittedly, they were residing alongwith the informant and her husband. She has specifically alleged that they have beaten her and also demanded unlawful demand from her. Thus, considering the material allegation against them, the application of the applicants deserves to be rejected. 7. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the investigation papers, at this stage a reference can be made to Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, which reads as under : “498A. 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. 943 APL-1071-2023 & APL-850-2023 4 Explanation. For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means- (a) any willful 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. Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offences committed by the husband or relatives of the husband subjecting cruelty towards the wife. The said provision shows that if any person or relative of the husband subjects woman for the ill-treatment would be responsible for punishment. Inclusion of Section 498 of the Indian Penal Code by way of an amendment was intended to curb cruelty inflicted on a women by her husband and his family, ensuring swift intervention by the State. However, in recent years, as there have been a notable rise in matrimonial disputes across the country, accompanied by growing discord and tension within the institution of marriage, consequently, there has been a growing tendency to misuse provisions like Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code as a tool for unleasing personal vendetta against the husband and his family by a wife. This observation came to be recorded by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Dara Lakshmi Narayan and Others vs. State of Telangana and Others, reported in AIR 2025 SC 173. 943 APL-1071-2023 & APL-850-2023 5 9. At this stage, a reference can be given to the following observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Preeti Gupta and Another vs. State of Jharkhand and Another, reported in (2010) 7 SCC 667 : “It has held that “it is a matter of common knowledge that unfortunately matrimonial litigation is rapidly increasing in our country. All the courts in our country including this court are flooded with matrimonial cases. This clearly demonstrates discontent and unrest in the family life like of a large number of people of the society. It is a matter of common experience that most of these complaints under section 498-A IPC are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations. We come across a large number of such complaints which are not even bona fide and are filed with oblique motive. At the same time, rapid increase in the number of genuine cases of dowry harassment is also a matter of serious concern. Unfortunately, at the time of filing of the complaint the implications and consequences are not properly visualized by the complainant that such complaint can lead to insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the complainant, accused and his close relations.” 10. In another case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam vs. State Of Bihar, reported in (2022) 6 SCC 599, the Hon’ble Apex Court after taking into consideration various decisions observed that “the above mentioned decisions clearly demonstrates that this Court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse of Section 498-A of the IPC and the increased tendency of implicating relatives of the husband in matrimonial dispute, without analyzing the long term ramification of a trial on the complainant as well as the accused. It is further manifest on the said judgments that the false implication 943 APL-1071-2023 & APL-850-2023 6 by way of general omnibus allegations made in the course of matrimonial dispute, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law. Therefore, this court by way of its judgments has warned the courts from proceedings against the relatives and in-laws of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against them.” 11. Keeping in mind the aforesaid observations, we find that this a fit case to exercise our jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in the light of the fact that the general and omnibus allegations are levelled against the applicants. No specific instances are narrated as far as demand of amount of the ill- treatment at the hands of the present applicants are concerned. The documents on record further shows that the applicant - brother-in- law was taking education at the relevant time at Bangalore which is far away of Nagpur. In view of that the possibility of false implication based on such omnibus allegations cannot be ruled out and keeping in mind aforesaid observations and the contents of the First Information Report, it can be observed that no case is made out against the present applicants on the basis of vague and omnibus allegations. In view of that the applications deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, we passed the following order : O R D ER i) The applications are allowed : ii) The First Information Report in connection with Crime No.164 of 2023 registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 506(2) and 943 APL-1071-2023 & APL-850-2023 7 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, is hereby quashed and set aside against the applicants i.e. applicant No.1 – Ayasha Bee Mohammad Yusuf Sheikh, applicant No.2 – Rehana Parveen Wakil Ahmad Sheikh, applicant No.3 – Wakil Ahmad Mohammad Yusuf Sheikh and applicant No.4 – Sheikh Aslam Sheikh Mohammad and applicant in criminal application No.850 of 2023 namely Sheikh Jouhar Arafat Wakeel Ahmad. 12. Both the applications are disposed of in above said terms. (NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) TAMBE