2021 Supreme(Bom) 922
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Ravindra V Ghuge, B.U. Debadwar, JJ.
Anil Baban Rathod - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Application No. 964 of 2020
Decided On : 17-03-2021
Amar Lavate, Advocate, S.J. Salunke, Advocate, R.V. Dasalkar, Advocate, Vishnu Jaware, Advocate
The court's decision highlighted the importance of specific allegations and involvement in alleged offenses when considering the quashing of F.I.R. and charge-sheet under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Headnote:
Section 482 - Quashing of F.I.R. - Indian Penal Code - 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 34 - Geeta Mehrotra and another V/s State of Uttar Pradesh and another, (2012) 10 SCC 741; Parbatbhai Aahir Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinghbhai Karmur and others V/s State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641
Fact of the Case:
The case involved an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing F.I.R. No.0060/2020 and Regular Criminal Case bearing R.C.C. No.249/2020, registered under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, concerning allegations of harassment and ill-treatment of the respondent by the applicants.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations against applicant nos.4 to 10, closely related to applicant nos.1 to 3, were vague and lacked specific involvement in the alleged offenses. The court invoked its powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the F.I.R. and charge-sheet against applicant nos.4 to 10, while dismissing the application to the extent of applicant nos.1 to 3.
Issues: The main issue was whether the allegations against applicant nos.4 to 10 warranted the quashing of the F.I.R. and charge-sheet under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles established in the cases of Geeta Mehrotra and Parbatbhai Aahir to determine that the vague and casual reference to applicant nos.4 to 10 without specific allegations of their involvement did not justify subjecting them to trial, and thus, the F.I.R. and charge-sheet were quashed to their extent.
Final Decision: The F.I.R. and charge-sheet were quashed to the extent of applicant nos.4 to 10, while the application to the extent of applicant nos.1 to 3 was dismissed.
JUDGMENT
B.U. Debadwar, J. - This is an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Hereinafter referred to as "the Cr.P.C."), for quashing F.I.R. No.0060/2020, dated 27.02.2020, registered at Police Station, Ambad, Dist. Jalna under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (Hereinafter referred to as "the I.P.C.") and Regular Criminal Case bearing R.C.C. No.249/2020, pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ambad, arising out of the said F.I.R.
2. Heard Mr.Amar Lavate, the learned Advocate for the applicants, Mr.Vishnu Jaware, the learned Advocate for respondent no.2 and Mr.R.V. Dasalkar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State.
3. Mr.Amar Lavate, the learned Advocate for the applicants, on instructions, withdrawn the application to the extent of applicant nos.1 to 3 and proceeded with the same to the extent of the rest of applicants i.e. applicant nos.4 to 10.
4. While taking us through the paper book annexed to the application, consisting of copies of the F.I.R. and charge-sheet, Mr.Amar Lavate, the learned Advocate submitted that the marriage of respondent no.2 with applicant no.1 - Anil has been solemnized on 26.05.2019. Only about four months after the marriage, respondent no.2 left the house of applicant no.1-Anil and went to her parental house situated at village Rahuwadi, Tq.Ambad, Dist. Jalna, without any reason, on her own accord. Applicant nos.4 to 10 are close relatives of applicant nos.1 to 3. They have no concerned with the matrimonial life of applicant no.1 and respondent no.2. They reside away from applicant nos.1 to 3, at different places. The allegations made in F.I.R. are omnibus allegations. No specific role in the alleged harassment is attributed to any of applicant nos.4 to 10. Their casual reference has been made in the F.I.R. and charge-sheet. The harassment is the only object to rope in them in the case. No fruitful purpose would be served by dragging them to face the trial, that would amount to abuse of process of law. It is on the face of record, that the ultimate result of the trial, if conducted, would be their acquittal. Thus, according to Mr.Amar Lavate, learned Advocate, this is a fit case, wherein inherent powers under section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be invoked for quashing the F.I.R. and the criminal case arising out of the said F.I.R. against applicant nos.4 to 10.
5. Per-Contra, Mr.Vishnu Jaware, the learned Advocate for respondent no.2 strenuously argued that applicant nos.4 to 10 are closely related with applicant nos.1 to 3. They are real brother, real sister, maternal uncle, wife of the maternal uncle, cousin brother, cousin brother and wife of cousin brother of applicant no.1 respectively. Though they reside at different places, are well connected with applicant nos.1 to 3. Some time, they directly harassed and ill-treated respondent no.2 and some time, they had instigated applicant nos.1 to 3 to harass respondent no.2 for coercing her to fulfill their demand of money. Their common intention with applicant nos.1 to 3 in harassment of respondent no.2 clearly reveals from the averments made in the F.I.R. After due investigation, they are found to have committed the offence under sections 498-A, 504, 506 of the I.P.C. along with applicant nos.1 to 3. Since, there is a strong prima facie case, no inherent powers to quash the F.I.R. and charge-sheet can be invoked to their extent. Therefore, the application is liable to be dismissed.
6. Mr.Dasalkar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent no.1-State, adopted the arguments submitted by Mr.Vishnu Jaware, learned Advocate for respondent no.2.
7. In the light of aforesaid submissions made at Bar by the learned Advocates representing both sides, we have carefully gone through the impugned F.I.R. and the impugned charge-sheet.
8. The allegations made in the F.I.R. bearing No.0060/2020 registered on 27.02.2020 at Police Station, Ambad, Dist. Jal