SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Bom) 2052

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD BENCH
T.V. Nalawade, K.K. Sonawane, JJ.
Haji - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra, Through Police Inspector - Respondent
Criminal Application No. 1804 of 2019, 1128 of 2019
Decided On : 23-07-2019

Advocates Appeared:
A.B. Jagtap, Advocate, V.D. Sapkal, Advocate, D.S. Jape, Advocate, R.P. Adgaonkar, Advocate, Shweta Ankulwar, Advocate

The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of specific allegations and the involvement of the applicants in the alleged acts of cruelty and unlawful demand of money, as well as the application of legal principles from relevant cases to support the decision.

Headnote:

Quash - Criminal Proceedings - Section 482 of Cr.P.C. - Indian Penal Code - 498-A, 406, 323, 504, 506 - Section 34 - Summary: The court considered the allegations of cruelty, unlawful demand of money, and physical and mental torture against the applicants. It found specific allegations against the husband, in-laws, and brother-in-law, and dismissed one application while allowing the other, quashing the penal proceeding initiated against the applicants in one case.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved allegations of cruelty, unlawful demand of money, and physical and mental torture against the applicants. The complainant-wife accused the husband and in-laws of maltreatment and harassment, leading to the filing of a First Information Report (FIR) at Gandhi Chowk Police Station, Latur, District Latur.

Finding of the Court:

The court found specific allegations of cruelty and unlawful demand of money against the applicants in one case, leading to the dismissal of the application. In the other case, the court found that the allegations against the applicants were vague and general in nature, leading to the quashing of the penal proceeding initiated against them.

Issues: The issues revolved around the allegations of cruelty, unlawful demand of money, and physical and mental torture against the applicants, and whether the penal proceeding should be quashed or allowed to proceed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the specific allegations and involvement of the applicants in the alleged acts of cruelty and unlawful demand of money. It also referenced legal principles from the cases of Madhavrao Jiwaji Rao Schindia and another Versus Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre and State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others to support its decision.

Final Decision: The court dismissed one application and allowed the other, quashing the penal proceeding initiated against the applicants in one case, while finding no scope for exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in favor of the applicants in the other case.

JUDGMENT

K.K.Sonawane, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally, with the consent of learned counsel for parties.

2. The point of controversy in both the proceedings are centered on the issue of quashing and setting aside the criminal proceeding bearing Crime No. 0019 of 2019 on the similar and identical facts and circumstances, therefore, both these allied proceedings are dealt with together for its decision on merit by this Common Judgment.

3. The applicants preferred present applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("Cr.P.C.") seeking relief to quash and set aside the First Information Report (FIR) bearing No. 0019 of 2019 registered at Gandhi Chowk Police Station, Latur, District Latur, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code ("IPC").

4. The prosecution case in short compass is that, applicants No. 1 to 4 in Criminal Application No. 1128 of 2019 are husband, in-laws, sister-in-law of complainant and applicant No.5 is the husband of sister-in-law i.e. applicant No.4. The applicants (in Criminal Application No. 1804 of 2019) are the distant relatives of husband of first informant. It has been alleged that first informant Mrs. Farhin W/o Wasim Bargir, on 10-01-2019 approached to the Police of Gandhi Chowk Police Station, Latur, District Latur and filed the report that her marriage was solemnized on 25-12-2011 with Mr. Wasim Bargir at Latur. It has been alleged that after the marriage, the father-in-law and sister-in-law used to scold the complainant that there was no proper arrangement in the marriage. The inmates of matrimonial home used to maltreat and harass the complainant on account of domestic work. They humiliate and insult her by saying that she could not do the work in proper manner. The complainant attempted to disclose about her persecution to husband, but, he assaulted her by kicks and fists. The husband also gave threats that she should not disclose these facts to anybody else; Otherwise, she would be allowed to go to her parents'' house. Initially, the complainant-wife did not disclose the fact of maltreatment to her parents. Lateron, she disclosed about ill-treatment to her parents. Thereupon, they convinced the complainant-wife for better future marital life. The father also told the complainant-wife that the marriage of her two sisters are remained to be performed. Therefore, the complainant-wife maintained silent. According to complainant, after fifteen days of marriage, the spouses started residing in Pamne Nigdi Pradhikaran Luk Building, Near Anand Hospital, in the flat on rent, that time her in-laws and one divorced sister-in-law were accompanied with them. After applicant-husband had been to office, the other inmates of matrimonial house used to torture and insult the complainant-wife on account of trifle reasons of not cooking, washing cloths properly, etc. They sarcastically used to say that they did not like her. The husband was also not paying attention to the grievance of complainant. In contrast, he used to beat and abused her. The applicants gave threats of desertion to the complainant wife. The husband used to come home in an inebriated state. He was also arranging wet parties with friends at home and asked the complainant-wife to prepare meal. The mediator of marriage Mr. Haji Jatkar and his wife came to matrimonial home of complainant. She ventilated the grievance to them, but, they also reprimanded and abused her in presence of inmates of matrimonial home. According to the complainant-wife, applicants also insisted her to bring Rs.25 Lakhs from her parents to purchase house property and for satisfaction of demand she was subjected to maltreatment and harassment.

5. It has been alleged that, in the month of May, 2012, the husband left the complainant-wife to her parents house at Latur. Thereafter, applicant-husband got employment in America, and hence, after giving understanding by t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top