The court emphasized the need to prevent the abuse of process of Court and to secure the ends of justice, particularly in cases involving matrimonial disputes and the misuse of provisions such as 498A IPC.

ORDER :

1. By way of this application filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the applicants seek to invoke inherent powers of this Court for quashing of the FIR in CR. No. 11206020220371 of 2022 registered with Kadi Police Station, Dist.: Mehsana, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 494, 323, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. This Court has heard learned counsel Mr. Vijay Nangesh and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. C.M. Shah for the respondent State. The private respondent, who has lodged the FIR, though served, is not appeared nor filed reply affidavit.

3. Brief facts giving rise to file present application are that, the marriage of the private respondent with Thakor Kishanji Chelaji was solemnized before 8 years of the date of the registration of the FIR. The private respondent went to matrimonial home where she had lived in a joint family. The husband having extra marital affairs with one Hiralben, as a result, the marriage life took a serious turn and she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home. The parties have executed the customary divorce deed on 28.02.2022. The FIR in question came to be filed on 28.03.2022 against the husband, brother-in-law, mother-in-law and father-in-law, inter-alia, alleging that, she was subjected to mental and physical harassment by the husband and in-laws. So far as role attributable to present applicants are concerned, who are mother-in-law and father-in-law, it is alleged that, they are supporting the husband, who got married with Hiralben.

4. Mr. Vijay Nangesh, learned advocate appearing for the applicants has submitted that, the FIR is absolutely false and frivolous and on reading of the office as alleged, is clearly not made out and same is instituted with malafide and ulterior motive. That the applicants are mother-in-law and father-in-law have nothing to do with the extra marital affairs maintained by their son. He invited the attention of this Court about the customary divorce allegedly executed by the wife and contended that, after one month of the said divorce, the FIR is being lodged against the applicants, which shows the malafide intention on her part. Thus, therefore, he would urge that, the applicants have been falsely implicated by making general allegations without their being any specific instances of harassment. In such circumstances, he would submit that so far applicants are concerned, no offence is made out and thus, considering the allegations leveled in the FIR, if they are accepted as it is, no offence is made out and this is a fit case to exercise inherent powers to prevent the misuse of the court and law.

5. On the other hand Ms. C.M. Shah, learned State counsel has submitted that, the factual aspect as canvassed by the applicants cannot be examined at this stage and thus, considering the allegations leveled against the applicants, prima-facie, offence as alleged is made out.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and on perusal of the allegations leveled in the FIR, the issue falls for my consideration is whether case is made out to quash the questioned FIR by invoking inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C?

7. Before adverting to the submissions made hereinabove, it is necessary to refer the settled law on the aspect of quashing the criminal proceedings, more particularly when the allegations pertaining to matrimonial dispute.

8. The scope and power of the High Court to quash the first information report is well settled. The power under Section 482 of the Code has to be exercised sparingly and cautiously to prevent the abuse of process of Court and to secure the ends of justice. The High Court should refrain from giving a prima facie decision, unless there are compelling circumstances to do so. Taking the allegations, as they are, without adding or subtracting anything, if no offence is made out, only then, the High Court would be justified in quashing the proceedings in the exercise of its