IMPORTANT POINT
Specific allegations are required against each accused in cases of cruelty and dowry demands; general allegations are insufficient for prosecution.

ORDER :

This is a petition by the petitioner seeking quashment of First Information Report No. 680 dated 20-9-2019 registered at Police Station Chhola mandir, district Bhopal and Charge-sheet dated 4-11-2019 for offences under section 498-A, 323, 294 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Counsel for the petitioners contends that petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 after long relationship, entered into wedlock on 12-3-2019. Petitioner No. 2 is sister of petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No. 3 is husband of petitioner No. 2. Petitioner No. 5 is also another sister of the present petitioner and petitioner No. 4 is husband of petitioner No. 5. Petitioner No. 6 is mother of petitioner No. 1.

3. It is contended by the counsel that after the marriage respondent No. 2 was not inclined to reside with the petitioner as according to respondent No. 2 she was uncomfortable in residing with the family members of the husband and, therefore, this aspect was admitted by the respondent No. 2 in the proceedings which were conducted by the Parivar Paramarsh Kendra. The counsel while taking this Court to proceedings of Parivar Paramarsh Kendra, contained in Annexure A-2, submits that the real cause which ultimately ensued in lodging F.I.R against the petitioners is to be unearthed while taking into consideration the conduct of the respondent No. 2. It is also contended by the counsel that an application under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed by petitioner No. 1 against the respondent No. 2. The said application was allowed and a decree of restitution of conjugal rights was passed. Later on as despite the decree of restitution of conjugal rights, when the respondent No. 2 failed to cohabit with the petitioner No. 1, the petitioner No. 1 filed an application under section 13, Hindu Marriage Act and the said application has also been allowed and there is a decree of dissolution of marriage. It is thus contended by the counsel that taking into consideration the aforesaid, it is evident that the present petitioners have been falsely implicated. Counsel for the petitioners while placing reliance on decision of Apex Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and others vs. State of Bihar and others, (2022) 6 SCC 599, Shafiya Khan @ Shakuntala Prajapati vs. State of U. P. and another, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 153 and order dated 13-6-2022 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Indore in Anita Rai vs. State of M. P., M.Cr.C No. 48916 of 2021 has sought quashing of First Information Report No. 680 dated 20-9-2019 registered at Police Station Chhola mandir, district Bhopal and charge-sheet dated 4-11-2019.

4. Counsel for the respondent State submits that present petition deserves to be dismissed. It is contended by the counsel that respondent No. 2 was subjected to cruelty and the First Information Report reflects specific allegation against all the petitioners. It is contended by the counsel that in the present case the main aspect of the matter is that in the matrimonial house two married sisters of the petitioner No. 1 are residing along with their husbands. It is contended by the counsel that all the petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 have mentioned their residence at Hamukhedi, Dewas Road, District Ujjain in cause title. It is also submitted by the counsel that proceedings of the Parivar Paramarsh Kendra also reflect that the married sisters of the petitioner No. 1 along with their husbands are residing in the same accommodation. It is contended by the counsel that while keeping in view this aspect of the matter if the allegations levelled in the F.I.R are subjected to scrutiny the same would reveal that there are specific allegations of cruelty while mentioning the specific dates on which the complainant was subjected to cruelty. Hence, submits that the present petition deserves to be dismissed.

5. Heard submissions and perused the record.

6. In the present case, on account of disputes after the marriage, the F.I.R has been lodged by the complainant. The peti