##PAGE1##

S. No.56

Suppl.1 List

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT SRINAGAR

CRM(M) No. 832/2025

CrlMNo.2100/2025

Date of pronouncement: 27.12.2025

Uploaded on: 29.12.2025

AIJAZ AHMAD KUMAR

…..Petitioner(s)

Through: Mr. Mir Majid Bashir, Advocate

V/s

UT OF J&K AND ANOTHER

… ..Respondent(s)

Through : None

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

1. The petitioner through the medium of present petition has

challenged the challan, arising out of FIR No.42 of 2023, of Women

Police Station, Rambagh, Srinagar and charge sheet for offences

under Section 498-A IPC, pending before the Court of learned

Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class (1^st Additional Munsiff) Srinagar.

2. As per allegations made in the charge sheet on 11.06.2023,

respondent No.2 lodged a report with the Police alleging therein that

she had entered into a wedlock with the petitioner in the year 2020,

but after the marriage, the petitioner and his parents have been

harassing her. It was also alleged that respondent No.2 has been

thrown out of her matrimonial home by the petitioner after giving a

beating to her. The Police after investigation of the case and after

recording the statements of witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C,

came to the conclusion that no offence is made out against the

parents of the petitioner, while as offence under Section 498-A IPC

stands established against the petitioner. Accordingly, the charge

sheet was laid before the learned trial Court.

3. The petitioner has challenged the charge sheet on the

grounds that the allegations made in the report lodged by respondent

No.2 and the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C against

the petitioner are omnibus in nature as the same are lacking material

particulars. Thus no offence is made out against the petitioner. It

has been further contended that respondent No.2 has filed petition

under Section 125 Cr.P.C against the petitioner on 19.06.2023 in

which she had herself stated that the petitioner has deserted her two

months before, but she has not leveled any allegation about cruelty

against the petitioner. Hence there is admission on the part of

respondent No.2 that the petitioner has not indulged in any act of

cruelty against her.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused

the material placed on record.

5. If we have a look at the statement of the complainant

recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C during the investigation of the

CRM(M) No.832 of 2025 Page 2 of 4

case, in the said statement respondent No.2 has alleged that her

husband (petitioner herein) was having illicit relations with other

women and when she objected to it, he did not refrain from doing so

and ultimately on 05.05.2023 he gave a beating to her and forcibly

threw her out of household. It has been further alleged that

respondent No.2 was subjected to mental and physical harassment

by the petitioner. Thus, there are specific allegations made by the

complainant in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C indicating

the particulars of the date on which she was beaten up and thrown

out of the house by the petitioner. She has also stated the reason as

to why the petitioner got annoyed with her and conducted himself

against her in a manner which caused mental harassment to her.

Therefore, it cannot be stated that the allegations made against the

petitioner are omnibus or that the same are lacking in material

particulars.

6. So far as contention of the petitioner that in the petition

under Section 125 Cr.P.C filed by respondent No.2 against him, she

has not made any allegations of cruelty is concerned, it is to be noted

that while filing petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C, the wife has only

to plead that her husband has deserted and neglected to maintain her.

She is not required to allege cruelty against her husband in the said

petition. Therefore, merely because respondent No.2 has omitted to

narrate the allegations regarding cruelty in her petition under Section

CRM(M) No.832 of 2025 Page 3 of 4

125 Cr.P.C, the same would not make t