JYOTI W/O MAHESH TIWARI v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PS KOLHAPURIGATE, DIST. AMRAVATI AND ANR
APL/1764/2026 · 2026-10-09
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 18488 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 18488 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Judgment 1 J-APL No.1764.2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1764 OF 2026 Jyoti W/o. Mahesh Tiwari,
Aged about 47 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. House No.5-5-58/59, Flat No.201, Krishan Residency Darussalam, Opposite Deccan Engineering College, Goshamahal Nampally Hyderabad, Telangana-500001.
…. APPLICANT // VERSUS // 1) State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Kolhapurigate, District-Amravati, Maharashtra-444601, 2) Shilpa W/o Mahavirprasad Upadhayay, Aged about 40 years, Occ.-Housewife, R/o. Near Dahisathratan Bhawan, Kolhapuri Gate, Amravati City, District-Amravati, Maharashtra-444601.
…. N ON-APPLICANTS
_____________________________________________________________ Mr. Gautam Jha, Advocate h/f. Mr. A. K. Tripathi, Advocate for applicants. Ms. H. N. Prabhu, Additional Public Prosecutor for non- applicant No.1/State. _____________________________________________________________
CORAM : M.W. CHANDWANI,
J.
DATED : OCTOBER 09, 2026
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Admit. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2026:BHC-NAG:13655
Judgment 2 J-APL No.1764.2026.odt
2. The applicant seeks quashing of First Information Report (FIR) No.009/2025, dated 18.01.2025, registered with Police Station, Kolhapuri Gate, Amravati City for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and consequent chargesheet No.101/2025, dated
18.08.2025.
3. The applicant is the sister-in-law of non-applicant No.2/complainant. On 18.01.2025, non-applicant No.2 lodged a complaint wherein she contended that her marriage was solemnized with co-accused Mahavirprasad Upadhyay on 07.05.2004. Her father incurred the entire expenses for the said marriage ceremony. After the marriage ceremony, non-applicant No.2 resumed cohabitation in her matrimonial house. For six months, she was treated well. Thereafter, she was ill-treated by the other co-accused. Non-applicant No.2 specifically alleged that the applicant and other co-accused were instigating her husband and on their instigation, co-accused Mahavirprasad was torturing her physically and mentally. On her complaint, the aforesaid offences came to be registered against the co- accused.
4.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the name of the present applicant was not mentioned in the FIR and no
Judgment 3 J-APL No.1764.2026.odt role was attributed to her in the FIR. It is contended that there is a reference of the applicant in the supplementary statement of non- applicant No.2 and statements of other witnesses without specifying any role. The allegations against the applicant are vague and general in nature. No specific instances are narrated about any ill-treatment at the hands of the applicant. It is further contended that the FIR in respect of the other co-accused who were named in the FIR was already quashed by this Court by order dated 25.02.2026 in Criminal Application (APL) No.553/2025. Hence, the learned counsel for applicant submitted that no case is made out even against the present applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of the IPC.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for non- applicant No.1/State objected to the application and submitted that, though the name of the applicant does not appear in the FIR, but the applicant used to instigate the husband of non-applicant No.2 and therefore, he sought rejection of the applicant.
6. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for non-applicant No.1/State. Though served, nobody appears on behalf of non-applicant No.2.
Judgment 4 J-APL No.1764.2026.odt
7. Having gone through the chargesheet, it appears that non-applicant No.2 has not stated the name of the applicant in the FIR and no role whatsoever is attributed to her in the FIR. It appears that in the supplementary statement, non-applicant No.2 alleged that when the present applicant used to visit her matrimonial house, she used to tell her husband that non-applicant No.2 does not participate in the household work and she has to do the entire household work herself, thereby instigating the husband of non-applicant No.2. Evidently, this allegation made by non-applicant No.2 is a general, vague and omnibus statement. The allegations are without specifying any details as to the date, time and place of occurrence or any willful conduct on the part of the applicant. Though, the name of the applicant was taken by the other witnesses, but the same is also vague and general in nature. Thus, it can be seen that sweeping allegations are levelled by these witnesses which do not support the allegations made by non-applicant No.2 in the FIR lodged by her. Needless to mention that, there are no allegations whatsoever with regard to Sections 323, 504 and 506 of the IPC against the present applicant.
8. That apart, this Court vide order dated 25.02.2026 passed in Criminal Application (APL) No.553/2025, quashed the FIR against the mother-in-law, the father-in-law and the other sister-in-law as
Judgment 5 J-APL No.1764.2026.odt well as the wife of the brother-in-law, whose names were specifically mentioned in the FIR. The case of the applicant is on a better footing than the other co-accused against whom the FIR is already quashed. Therefore, a case is made out for exercising the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to quash the FIR and consequent proceedings against the present applicant. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order : (i) The Criminal Application is allowed. (ii) FIR No.009/2025, dated 18.01.2025, registered with Police Station, Kolhapuri Gate, Amravati City for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and consequent chargesheet No.101/2025, dated 18.08.2025., is hereby quashed and set aside, qua the present applicant.
9. The criminal application is disposed of.
(M.W. CHANDWANI, J.) Kirtak Signed by: Mr. B.J. Kirtak Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 12/10/2026 19:38:10