IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE ON THE 24.9.2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 9851 of 2024 PRASHANT SINGH KAURAV AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Prashant Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Samar Ghuraiya Dy Ga appearing on behalf of Advocate General.

Shri Pradeep Katare, learned counsel for the respondent [R-2].

ORDER This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of the FIR registered at Crime No.236/2023 at Police Station Kotwali Datia, District Datia for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 34 of IPC and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.

2. The short facts of the case are that the complainant was married to co-accused Uday Raj Singh Kaurav on 19.06.2021 in accordance with Hindu rites and customs. It is alleged that at the time of marriage, the complainant’s family members had given a cash amount of Rs. 25,00,000/-, along with one gold chain, two gold earrings, and three gold rings, to the groom and his family members as dowry and gifts customary to the occasion. After a period of about five months from the date of marriage, the accused persons, including the present applicants, began to subject the complainant to cruelty and harassment in connection with unlawful demands of additional dowry. The accused persons allegedly demanded a further sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- and a four-wheeler, and upon the complainant’s and her family’s inability to fulfill these demands, she was subjected to persistent mental and physical cruelty. The complainant and her family members are stated to have made several attempts to reconcile the matter and requested the accused persons to desist from such unlawful demands. However, the accused persons allegedly continued their course of harassment and cruelty towards the complainant. On 30.03.2023, the complainant was physically assaulted by her father-in- law, Brajendra Singh Kaurav, one of the co-accused in the present case. Consequently, the complainant contacted her brothers, Luvkush Kaurav and Surendra Kaurav, who immediately came to her matrimonial home. In their presence, a verbal altercation ensued between the complainant and the accused persons, namely her father-in-law, mother-in-law, husband, and Applicant No. 1 (brother-in-law), regarding the continued demand for dowry. Thereafter, on 01.04.2023, the complainant’s brothers took her back to her parental home for her safety and well-being. The complainant has further alleged that when she later returned to Datia with the intention of resuming her matrimonial life, the accused persons refused to allow her entry into the matrimonial house and denied her cohabitation with her husband. On the basis of the said complaint, FIR was registered against the applicants under Section 498A, 34 of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the allegations levelled against the present petitioners are false. It is also pertinent to mention here that the allegations leveled by the respondent no.2 are completely omnibus in nature and no specific allegation has been made against anyone. It is further submitted that the present FIR has been filed just to harass the family members of matrimonial side and to extort the money from them under the garb of present FIR, on the basis of a completely cooked up story and from bare reading of FIR, it can be deduced that no specific allegation had been made against any member only omnibus allegations have been made which shows that the aforesaid FIR was registered with the ulterior motive.

4. It has further been argued that the present case is nothing but a clear misuse of criminal law provisions, particularly those relating to matrimonial offences. The impugned FIR has been lodged as a counter-blast to the divorce proceedings initiated by co-accused Uday Raj