Vague, omnibus allegations lacking specifics in matrimonial cruelty cases under Section 498A IPC do not constitute offence; inconsistent claims, no relative roles, rubber-stamp cognizance warrant quashing to curb process abuse.

JUDGEMENT :

ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

1. Heard Ms. Kalyani Mangave, learned Advocate for the Applicants, Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent No. 1 and Ms. Aarti Pandey, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.

2. Given the dispute in this Criminal Application, which is a family matter, on 17.01.2026, the parties were called upon to explore the possibility of a settlement. On 22.01.2026, Ms. Kalyani Mangave, learned Advocate for the Applicants and Ms. Aarti Pandey, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2, reported that the settlement had failed.

3. This Criminal Application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), is preferred by the Applicants against the First Information Report No. 1299 of 2022, dated 30.12.2022, registered with the Kondhwa Police Station, District-Pune, for offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 506, 504 & 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”); the Charge-sheet arising out of the said FIR, registered as Regular Criminal Case No. 1194 of 2023, pending before the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pune (Magistrate) and the Order taking cognizance dated 28.08.2023, passed by the Magistrate in RCC No. 1194 of 2023.

4. Material facts relevant to the adjudication of the present Criminal Application are that Respondent No. 2 is an Assistant Branch Manager in a Bank, whereas Applicant No. 2 is employed with a Private Limited Company in Hyderabad. Applicant No. 1 is the mother-in-law of Respondent No. 2. The marriage between Applicant No. 2 (husband) and Respondent No. 2 (wife) was solemnized on 19.04.2019. Out of the said wedlock, a daughter was born on 01.05.2021. Apparently, matrimonial discord between Applicant No. 2 and Respondent No. 2 led Applicant No. 2 to address an email dated 03.12.2022 to the Commissioner of Police, Pune, expressing apprehension that Respondent No. 2 would implicate the Applicants in a false criminal case (Page No. 58 of the paper-book).

5. The FIR was registered by Respondent No. 1 on a complaint lodged by Respondent No. 2 on 30.12.2022. The FIR alleges that, at the time of marriage in 2019, the Applicants demanded dowry, a car, and a stay at a Five Star Hotel in Patna. Respondent No. 2 alleges that the Applicants subjected her to cruelty, resulting in physical and mental harassment. Respondent No. 2 states that she and Applicant No. 1 purchased a flat by contributing to the down payment. Respondent No. 2 claims to pay the flat loan, whereas Applicant No. 2 receives the rent. Respondent No. 2 states in her complaint that, from August 2021, Applicant No. 2 was posted at Mohali for training and that he did not visit her even once for a period of one year after his posting at Mohali, though he continued to trouble her by phone. She alleges that Applicant No. 2 returned in July 2022 after his training and continued the harassment.

6. Upon investigation, a charge sheet was filed, and the Judicial Magistrate First Class of the Pune Cantonment Court, Pune (Magistrate), has taken cognizance of the charge sheet.

7. The present Criminal Application was initially filed as Criminal Writ Petition No. 1676 of 2025. By order dated 26.09.2025, on the request of the Applicants for the reasons recorded in the said order, the Applicants were granted leave to convert the said Criminal Writ Petition into a Criminal Application. Ms. A