Digambar vs State of Maharashtra - 2024 Supreme(SC) 1228

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(SC) 1228

B. R. GAVAI, K. V. VISWANATHAN
Digambar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent

Judgement Key Points

The legal document pertains to a case where criminal proceedings initiated against the appellants, who are the parents-in-law of the complainant, were challenged and ultimately quashed by the court. The core issue revolves around allegations of cruelty and misconduct, including infliction of mental and physical cruelty, causing miscarriage, and administering poisonous food, leading to criminal charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code.

The court emphasized that the allegations made in the FIR were vague, omnibus, and lacked specific details or concrete evidence linking the appellants to the alleged acts. It was noted that there was no mention of the appellants' knowledge of the pregnancy or any direct involvement in the miscarriage, which undermines the credibility of the accusations under sections related to cruelty and causing miscarriage (!) (!) .

Furthermore, the timing of the FIR—filed after the divorce notice—suggested that the proceedings were initiated with an ulterior motive, primarily to pressure the appellants and their son into accepting divorce terms. The court observed that the allegations appeared to be motivated by personal discord and revenge rather than genuine criminal intent (!) (!) .

The court also highlighted the importance of scrutinizing whether the allegations, when taken at face value, would constitute a prima facie case. It found that the allegations did not meet this standard, as they were vague, general, and unsupported by specific incidents or evidence. The absence of detailed, credible evidence and the timing of the FIR indicated a misuse of legal provisions, particularly provisions meant to protect women from cruelty, which should not be exploited for personal vendettas (!) (!) .

Based on these considerations, the court held that continuing with the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of process of law. The inherent powers of the court should be exercised to prevent such misuse, and in this case, justified the quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings against the appellants (!) (!) .

In conclusion, the court allowed the appeal, quashed the criminal proceedings, and set aside the impugned order of the High Court, emphasizing that allegations must be specific, credible, and supported by concrete evidence before criminal proceedings are sustained.

JUDGMENT :

B.R. GAVAI, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The present appeal challenges the final judgment and order dated 23rd January 2020 passed in Criminal Application 859 of 2019, vide which the learned Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay at Aurangabad dismissed the application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973¹ [“Cr.P.C.” hereinafter] for quashing and setting aside the First Information Report² [“FIR” hereinafter] No. 339 of 2018 dated 6th November 2018 registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Latur for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 312, 313 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860³ [“IPC” hereinafter] filed against the husband of the complainant-Madhav Suryawanshi and the present appellants-Digambar Suryawanshi (Appellant No. 1) and Kashibai Suryawanshi (Appellant No. 2) (Parents-in-law of the complainant)

3. Shorn of details, the facts leading up to the present appeal are as under: