JUDGMENT :

M. K. THAKKER, J.

1. The present application is filed under section 482 of Cr.PC for quashment of the FIR being 11203008210032/ 2021 registered with Bilkha Police Station, Junagadh for the offence punishable under section 504, 506(2) 507, 114 of IPC stating the offence, which is alleged to have been committed from the period 25.11.2020 to 18.11.2020 as per the case of the complainant, in the impugned FIR is that the marriage of the first informant was solemnized with accused no.1 and prior to 5 years from the date of marriage, the accused no.1 was engaged to accused no.2 i.e the present applicant. Somehow, the marriage was not solemnized and accused no.1 got married to the complainant. As per the allegations, the dispute arose between the husband and wife and she was thrown out from the matrimonial house and therefore, complainant filed application under section 125 of CrPC. It is contended in the FIR that despite the order of maintenance was passed, the husband never paid the amount which is ordered by the learned Family Court and has started living with the present applicant in live in relationship agreement. On 30.11.2020, the complainant received a call from the mobile of the present applicant informing that she may give divorce to the accused no.1 or could face dire consequences. Again, on 7.24 hours, the brother of the applicant no.1 i.e applicant no.2 has called and similar threats were issued to her. Thereafter, she received calls from different four numbers and in all four calls she received abusive language and inquiring regarding the family of the complainant. With the above allegations, the complaint came to be lodged on 02.04.2021, which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court.

2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Rohit Verma for the applicant and learned advocate Ms.Avani Patel for the complainant and Learned APP Mr.Ronak Raval for the respondent-State.

2.1. It is submitted by learned advocate Mr.Rohit Verma, appearing for the applicant, that there is a dispute between the husband and wife and though the present applicant no.1 was the ex-fiancee of the accused no.1 was falsely dragged into the matrimonial dispute. It is submitted that there was altercation between the complainant and the applicant as complainant has created the group on 26.11.2022, where the relatives of the present applicants were joined in the said group and abusive messages were posted on the said group. It is submitted by learned advocate Mr.Rohit Verma that one FIR came to be lodged by the present applicant no.1 on 10.05.2022 for the offence punishable under section 469, 500, 507 of IPC and 66c and 67 of the I.T.Act. The said FIR culminated into charge-sheet which is filed on 10.05.2022 and said FIR was filed after a delay of 5 months of so called incident. It is submitted that false allegations are made against the present applicant that she is staying with the accused no. one in live-in relationship. It is submitted by learned advocate Mr.Rohit Verma that only to malign the image of the present applicant false accusations are made and the continuation of the impugned FIR would be abuse of process of law.

2.2. Learned advocate Mr.Rohit Verma has relied on the decision of this Court in the case of Diyalbhai Lavjibhai Mathodiya Vs State of Gujarat reported in 2026 (0) AIJEL-HC 253092 and submitted that the FIR was delayed by 5 months and therefore, it cannot be said that to causing alarm which is prior required to attract the provisions of section 500 the calls were made. It is submitted by learned advocate Mr.Rohit Verma that even on bare reading of the FIR also does not disclose any cognizable offence against of present applicant and in that background, the impugned FIR is deserves to be quashed by allowing the present application.

2.3. Per Contra, learned advocate Ms.Avani Patel, appearing for the respondent no.2, has submitted that there are number of proceedings initiated by the complainant against the accused no.1 and as the a