Modification of Order dtd.

undefined IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 4102 of 2021 [On note for speaking to minutes of order dated 10/10/2025 in R/SCR.A/4102/2021 ]

==========================================================

GAUTAMI SANDEEP SONARA WIFE OF SANDEEP SONARA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR SHUBHAM JHAJHARIA(10231) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR. KIRTAN H MISTRY(10012) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR.NISARG P RAVAL(7262) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Date : 14/10/2025

ORAL ORDER

No case is made out to entertain note for speaking to minutes. Accordingly, the note for speaking to minutes stands dismissed.

(J. C. DOSHI,J)

SHEKHAR P. BARVE undefined IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 4102 of 2021 ==========================================================

GAUTAMI SANDEEP SONARA WIFE OF SANDEEP SONARA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR SHUBHAM JHAJHARIA(10231) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR. KIRTAN H MISTRY(10012) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR.NISARG P RAVAL(7262) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR CHINTAN DAVE, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)

No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Date : 10/10/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ”the Code”), the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside FIR being C.R.No.11191030210020 registered with Ahmedabad City Western Mahila Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 406, 506(2), 114 of the IPC as well as all other consequential proceedings arising out of the aforesaid FIR qua the petitioner herein.

2. Learned advocate for the applicant would submit that as per FIR the petitioner is paramour of husband of complainant. Learned advocate for the applicant takes this Court through relevant allegations in the FIR and submits that except allegations that the petitioner was in relationship with husband of the complainant, there is no other allegations levelled against the petitioner. Learned advocate for the applicant having referred to judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of U.Suvetha v/s. State by Inspector of Police [2009 (6) SCC 757] and in the case of Dechamma I.M.@ Dechamma Koushik v/s. State of Karanataka [2024(0) INSC 972] would submit that term relative of husband of woman does not include girl-friend as relative of husband of woman. He would submit that word relative brings within purview of status and such status must be conferred either by blood or marriage or adoption. In the present case, petitioner is not relative of husband of woman and provision of section 498(A) would not be attracted.

2.1. Upon above submissions, it is submitted to allow the application.

3. Learned advocate for private respondent submits that apart from section 498(A) of IPC, allegations of offence under section 406, 506(2), 114 of IPC are made in the FIR. It is submitted that since necessary ingredient are found from the FIR, it is submitted not to quash the FIR and submitted to dismiss the application.

4. Learned APP, in the peculiar facts of the case, requests to pass necessary orders.

5. I have heard learned advocates for both the sides, perused record as well as authority cited at bar. It is noticed that the petitioner is alleged to be girl-friend of the husband of the complainant. No status has been align with the petitioner. Learned APP who argued to disallow the application, could not found any relationship of petitioner with husband of complainant, except she being girl-friend of the husband.

6. Examined the allegations levelled i