IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIMANSHU JOSHI

th

ON THE 17 OF DECEMBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 4824 of 2025 RAMNARESH KUSHWAHA AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Manoj Kushwaha - Advocate for the applicants.

Shri Ravindra Rajput - Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.

ORDER Learned counsel for the applicants prays for withdrawal of this petition in respect of applicant no.1 Ramnaresh Kushwaha.

2. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed as withdrawn in respect of applicant no.1 Ramnaresh Kushwaha.

3. This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of the FIR / Crime No.184/2024 registered at the Police Station, Sabhapur District Satna in respect of the offence punishable under Sections 498-A of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and ensued proceedings.

4. As per the prosecution story, the marriage of the applicant no.1 was solemnized with respondent no.2 on 07.05.2023 according to Hindu Rituals and right. After sometime, the applicants and his relatives demanded dowry and committed torturing mentally. Thereafter, the complainant has lodged the FIR on 12.09.2024 at P.S. Sabhapur District Satna for which the offence punishable under Sections 498-A of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act has been registered against the applicants.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants contends that the applicant nos.2 to 4 have been falsely implicated in the case. It is contended by the counsel that the the applicant No.2 is the Jethani of the complainant. Applicant Nos.3 and 4 are the Bhatija of the complainant and they are residing at Sukli Post HBPM Ukhli Amravati Maharashtra. It is contended by the counsel that even if the allegations so levelled in the FIR are taken into consideration on their face value, the same would reveal that no specific allegations have been levelled against the applicant nos.2 to 4. On the contrary, general and omnibus allegations have been levelled in FIR. It is contended by the counsel that the applicant nos.2 to 4 have made accused only on account of the fact that they are relatives of husband of respondent no.2. Hence counsel submits that the FIR which has been lodged against the applicant nos.2 to 4 deserves to be quashed.

6. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that there are direct allegations against the applicants. The present applicants treated respondent no.2 with cruelty and she was subjected to demand of dowry which is evident from the FIR. The allegations levelled in the FIR have been supported by all other witnesses and their statements have been recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. It is thus, contended by the counsels that petition deserves to be dismissed.

7. Heard the submissions and perused the record.

8. A perusal of the record reveals that applicant No.2 is the Jethani, applicant Nos.3 and 4 are the Bhatija of the complainant. They have been implicated only on the basis that they are the relative of the applicant no.1, who is the husband of respondent no.2. It is further evident from perusal of the FIR and all the statements available on record that so far as applicant nos.2 and 4 are concerned the allegations against them are general and omnibus in nature.

9. The Apex Court in the case of Dara Laxmi Narayana & Ors. Vs.

State of Telangana and Anr. reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 3682 observed in paragraphs 24, 26 and 27 as under:-

"24. The learned counsel for respondent No.1 State contended that a prima facie case was made out against the appellants for harassing respondent No.2 and demanding dowry from her. However, we observe that the allegations made by respondent No.2 in the FIR seem to be motivated by a desire for retribution rather than a legitimate grievance. Further, the allegations attributed against the appellants herein are vague and omnibus.

26. Insofar as appellants 2 to 6 are concerned, we find that they have no connection to