The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to exercise the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. sparingly and cautiously to prevent the abuse of process of Court and to secure the ends of justice, particularly in the context of matrimonial disputes and the misuse of provisions such as Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

ORDER :

1. Since the issue involved in both the applications are identical and arise from the same FIR, they have been heard together and disposed of by this common order.

2. The applicant Niharika Dilipbhai Trivedi (Cr.M.A. 7737 of 2022) is the distant relative of the private respondent, whereas, the applicants – Krutiben, Krupali and Darshan Bhavsar (Cr.M.a. No. 9933 of 2022) are sister-in-laws and family member of respondent no. 2. The marriage of the respondent no. 2 with one Rohan Bhatti, was solemnized in the year 2017 and after the marriage, the respondent wife went to matrimonial home at Kutch-Gandhidham. Due to matrimonial dispute, she lodged an FIR against the applicants and other family members of the husband, inter-alia, alleging that, she has been subjected to mental and physical harassment at the instance of husband and his relatives.

3. In the aforesaid background facts, the applicants, who are relatives of the husband have preferred the aforesaid applications by invoking inherent powers of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., for quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated by the respondent wife.

4. Brief facts giving rise to file present applications are that, the marriage was solemnized on 11.12.2017. The respondent wife after the marriage went to her matrimonial home and it was a joint family and family consisting of mother-in-law, father-in-law. The sister-in-laws namely Krutiben and Krupali are living separately at their respective matrimonial home. In the month January, 2021, the respondent no. 2 wife due her pregnancy went to her parental home for delivery. It is alleged that, when she came to parental home for delivery, she used to talk on mobile with the in-laws and due to some differences, she was harassed by in-laws on trivial issues and after the birth of daughter, the husband and in-laws show disinterest in taking her back to matrimonial home and when she raised the issue with the in-laws, she was scolded by them and asked that her behavior needed improvement. It is further alleged that, on 23.01.2022, she came back at her matrimonial home, where, the in-laws and husband misbehaved with her and was not properly welcomed. It is further alleged by the respondent wife that, she was called at the house of uncle-in-law, where the applicants and other members assembled for social purpose. In the said gathering the objections were raised by the in-laws about the coming return back by her at the matrimonial home. During the said ruckus, it is alleged that the mother-in-law, father-in-law and the applicant Darshan have beaten eaten up her and at that time, the applicant Niharika Trivedi who being a distant relative of the husband, threatened her that she will beat her and in that process, the sister-in-laws have instigated the husband and others.

5. In the aforesaid facts, the respondent wife in her FIR alleges that, she was mentally and physically harassed by the in-laws and husband, whereby, they have committed the offence of cruelty and causing voluntary hurt punishable under the provision of the Indian Penal Code.

6. Mr. A.J. Pandya, learned advocate and Mr. A.L. Pandav, learned counsel for the applicants have submitted that, the impugned FIR is vindictive in nature and is clearly an abuse of process of law and same is absolutely false and frivolous and on reading of it, the offence of cruelty is clearly not made out. The allegations are totally vague and highly improbable and it is a case of over implication and proceedings is manifestly attended with malafide and is maliciously instituted with a ulterior motive.

7. Mr. A.J. Pandya with Mr. K.J. Upadhyay, learned advocates appearing for the applicant – Niharika Trivedi, has submitted that, on bare perusal of the FIR, nothing being alleged against her so far, act of cruelty is concerned. The applicant being an elderly member of the family, tried to mediate the dispute between husband and wife and she has nothing to do with the marital discord of the husband and wife