1 apl1890.26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.1890 OF 2026 Abhishek Ratnakar Bhoyar Aged 25 years, Occ: Student, R/o 36, Near Mahakali Mandir, Ward No.3, Ganesh Nagar, Borgaon (Meghe), District Wardha. ...APPLICANT ...V E R S U S… 1. State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, P.S. Gadge Nagar, Amravati. 2. Ganga Ratankar Bhoyar Aged 43 years, Occ: Housewife R/o Inside Tapovan Gate, Ambika Nagar, Mardi Road Amravati, Tq. & Dist. Amravati. ...NON-APPLICANTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms Amruta Ghonge, Advocate for applicant. Ms D.I. Charlewar, APP for non-applicant no.1. Shri S.S. Patil, Advocate for non-applicant no.2 (through VC) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM:- M.W. CHANDWANI, J. DATE :- 09.10.2026 ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Heard. 2. Admit. 3. The applicants seek quashing of the First Information Report bearing Crime No.943/2022 dated 21.08.2022 registered with Police Station, Gadge Nagar, District Amravati for the offences 2026:BHC-NAG:13802 2 apl1890.26.odt punishable under Sections 498-A and 506(2), read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “IPC”) as well as Charge-sheet No.1149/2023 arising out of the said FIR. 4. The charge-sheet depicts that the applicant is the stepson of non-applicant No.2/complainant. Non-applicant No.2 is the second wife of deceased Ratnakar Bhoyar who is the father of the applicant. Their marriage was solemnized on 13.02.2005. Non- applicant No.2 lodged the complaint with Police Station, Gadge Nagar alleging that after marriage, her husband (now deceased) did not give her the status of his wife. He used to tell her that he is married to her only for the purpose of money. He used to disrespect her and also used to assault her by means of fist blows. On 31.12.2007, deceased Ratnakar Bhoyar ousted non-applicant No. 2 alongwith his minor daughter – Samiksha on the say of the mother-in-law, sister-in-law and a person named Shelke by abusing and assaulting her. It is alleged that in the year 2014, the relative of the applicant had been to the house of non-applicant No.2 and pressed for divorce. When she refused, they threatened her parents and brother. It is also alleged that on 07.04.2022, she had been to the Family Court to attend the proceedings. When she asked the deceased for his documents for the purpose of education of his 3 apl1890.26.odt daughter - Samiksha, the deceased, the applicant and other co- accused threatened her. Therefore, on complaint of non-applicant no.2, the aforesaid offences came to be registered against the applicant and other co-accused. 5. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned APP for non-applicant no.1/State as well as learned counsel for non- applicant No.2. Learned counsel for non-applicant no.2 appeared and argued through video conferencing and opposed the application. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no allegation against the applicant of any harassment which amounts to cruelty within the meaning of Section 498-A. It is contended that the applicant has not played any role in the dispute between his father and step-mother. According to her, there is nothing on record to suggest that the applicant has ever harassed non-applicant No.2. Though, the FIR speaks about the applicant threatening non-applicant no.2 along with his father in the Family Court, but the supplementary statement of non-applicant no.2 reveals that no threat whatsoever was given by the applicant. According to her, this allegation is also general and vague. 4 apl1890.26.odt Therefore, no case is made out against the applicant either under Section 498-A or Section 506 of the IPC. 7. Per contra, learned A.P.P, assisted by Shri Sachin Patil, learned counsel for non-applicant no.2 objected to the application on the ground that there is material in the charge-sheet which warrants a criminal trial. According to learned counsel for non- applicant no.2, the case in hand requires recording of evidence before the trial Court. It is further contended that during pendency of the prosecution, the husband of non-applicant No.2 i.e. the father of the applicant has died. There is an ongoing dispute between the applicant and non-applicant No.2 and a writ petition is pending in respect of her appointment on compassionate grounds. Hence, he sought rejection of the application. 8. Perusal of the charge-sheet reveals that deceased Ratnakar Bhoyar had earlier married the elder sister of non- applicant No.2. From the said marriage, the applicant and his sister i.e. Samiksha were born. After the death of the first wife, deceased Ratnakar Bhoyar performed second marriage with her sister i.e. non-applicant no.2 in the year 2005. It appears that there was matrimonial discord between deceased Ratnakar Bhoyar and non-applicant No. 2. There are allegations that deceased Ratnakar 5 apl1890.26.odt Bhoyar did not give her the status of his wife and also used to assault her without any reason by means of fist blows. On 31.12.2007, non-applicant no.2 was thrown out of the house by deceased Ratnakar Bhoyar at the instance of the other co-accused. The only role assigned to the applicant who is the stepson of non- applicant no.2 is that when non-applicant no.2 had been to the Family Court to attend the pending proceedings, she asked for the documents from deceased Ratnakar Bhoyar for the purpose of education his daughter. The FIR depicts that the applicant, alongwith deceased Ratnakar Bhoyar threatened her of dire consequences. Apart from this, there are no allegations whatsoever against the applicant. 9. This takes me to the supplementary the statement of non-applicant No.2, wherein she reiterated the incident which happened in the Family Court by stating that when she asked for the documents of her husband deceased Ratnakar Bhoyar for the education of his daughter, he refused and threatened to beat her up by tying her hands and legs. This statement does not assign any role to the applicant of having given any threat. Thus, the allegations made in the FIR do not reveal as to who threatened non-applicant no.2.The allegations of threat mentioned in the FIR 6 apl1890.26.odt are general and vague in nature and do not match with the allegations made in the supplementary document. There is no material against the applicant of any harassment which can be termed as cruelty within the meaning of Section 498-A of the IPC. So also, there is no material to show that on 07.04.2022, the applicant threatened non-applicant No.2. Thus, there is no material whatsoever against the applicant to constitute the offence under Section 498-A and 506 of IPC. 10. A reference can be made to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajanlal and others 1, which reads thus: “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we have given the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face 1 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 7 apl1890.26.odt value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 8 apl1890.26.odt 11. In view of the above, the present case is squarely covered by the decision of Bhajanlal (supra). Therefore, a case is made out for exercising the inherent powers of this Court to quash the FIR. Hence, the following order is passed: i. The application is allowed. ii. First Information Report bearing Crime No.943/2022 dated 21.08.2022 registered with Police Station, Gadge Nagar, District Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 506(2), read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as Charge-sheet No.1149/2023 arising out of the said FIR are hereby quashed and set aside, qua the present applicant. iii. The application stands disposed of. (M.W. CHANDWANI J.) Wagh Signed by: Mr. S.R. Wagh Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 14/10/2026 16:52:32