SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 3017

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Mohar Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
MCRC 1862/2020



Advocates:
Prashant Sharma,Advocate General

##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3738

1 MCRC-1862-2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

AT GWALIOR

BEFORE

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE

th

ON THE 29 OF JANUARY, 2026

MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 1862 of 2020

MOHAR SINGH AND OTHERS

Versus

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS

Appearance:

Shri Siddarth Sharma appeared for petitioner.

Shri Harish Sharma Dy Ga appearing on behalf of Advocate General.

Shri Brijendra Singh Gour, learned counsel for the respondent [R-2].

ORDER

This petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashment of the FIR registered

as Crime No. 0209/2019 at Police Station Ater, District Bhind (M.P.) for the

offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 34 of the IPC and Sections

3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, along with all consequential

proceedings arising therefrom.

2. As per the prosecution story, the marriage between Petitioner No. 1

and Respondent No. 2 was solemnized on 19-04-2019 according to Hindu

rites and customs. At the relevant time, Petitioner No. 1 was posted at Ujjain,

and Respondent No. 2 voluntarily accompanied him. Shortly after the

marriage, it became evident that Respondent No. 2’s behavior was not

proper. She was continuously engaged in phone conversations with unknown

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: ASHISH PAWAR

Signing time: 06-02-2026

18:09:35

##PAGE2##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3738

2 MCRC-1862-2020

persons. Upon inquiry, it was revealed that Respondent No. 2 had been in a

relationship prior to marriage and was unwilling to accept Petitioner No. 1 as

her husband. She repeatedly refused to engage in marital relations, causing

mental cruelty to Petitioner No. 1. Despite repeated attempts by Petitioner

No. 1 to make her understand her marital obligations, there was no change in

her behavior. After some time petitioner No. 1 started residing at 14-Dipti

Nagar and during that period, he came to know that some person was

visiting Respondent No. 2 in his absence. When confronted, Respondent No.

2 admitted that she was in a relationship with one Awadhesh Gurjar, and was

unable to discharge her duties as a wife. On 09-09-2019, Petitioner No. 1

found a handwritten note left by Respondent No. 2 indicating her intention to

leave the house. Thereafter, petitioner No. 1 learned from Awadhesh Gurjar

that Respondent No. 2 was at Ujjain Railway Station, and fearing for her life

due to prior suicidal threats, he personally went to bring her back.

3. It is submitted that the parents of Respondent No. 2 were contacted

and were also unwilling to condone her behavior. They took her away from

Ujjain, and Petitioner No. 1 later came to know that she returned to Bhind

and continued cohabiting with Awadhesh Gurjar. The illicit relationship

between Respondent No. 2 and Awadhesh Gurjar continued, causing

Petitioner No. 1 to file an application under Section 13(1) of the Hindu

Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage. A Section 14 application for

permission to file the petition within one year was allowed. It is submitted

that Respondent No. 2 has, despite her admitted misconduct, lodged a false

complaint with the police. Petitioner No. 1 had already approached the police

Signature Not Verified

Signed by: ASHISH PAWAR

Signing time: 06-02-2026

18:09:35

##PAGE3##

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:3738

3 MCRC-1862-2020

authorities regarding apprehensions about Respondent No. 2’s conduct. It is

submitted that Respondent No. 2, by lodging a false complaint, is attempting

to misuse the process of law. The complaint is malicious and has been filed

to conceal her own misconduct.

4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the

allegations are false, motivated, and have been filed only to harass the

petitioners and to pressurize them after matrimonial proceedings were

initiated by Petitioner No. 1. The FIR does not disclose any prima facie

offence, and continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to

misuse of the criminal justice system. It is submit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top