2009 ALL MR (Cri) 1134
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY(AURANGABAD BENCH)

S.S. SHINDE, J.

Maya D/O. Gajanan Dhas Vs. State Of Maharashtra & Anr.

Criminal Application No.2006 of 2008

2nd March, 2009

Petitioner Counsel: Shri. K. M. NAGARKAR,Shri. A. M. NAGARKAR
Respondent Counsel: Shri. J. S. GAVANE,Shri. R. B. NARWADE PATIL

Criminal P.C. (1973), Ss.482, 154 - Quashing of FIR - Application for - Cruelty - Allegation as to illicit relationship between applicant and husband of complainant - Fact that applicant and husband of complainant used to talk on cell phone with each other, held, that cannot be a basis to come to the conclusion that there is necessarily illicit relationsip between the complainant's husband and the applicant - A conclusion cannot be drawn without any evidence that there is illicit relationship between the applicant and the husband of complainant - Further, investigation or proceedings as the case may be based on the F.I.R. so far as it relates to the present applicant quashed and set aside - Application allowed. Penal Code (1860), Ss.498-A, 323, 504, 506 r/w. S.34. (Paras 5, 6)

JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT :- This application is filed praying for quashing and setting aside the F.I.R./Crime No.I-35/2008 registered at Shrirampur Taluka Police Station, Shrirampur on 17.5.2008 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 r.w. 34 of I.P.C..

Rule, returnable forthwith by consent.

2. The learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that from the recitals of the F.I.R. it is clear that the complainant has not attributed any role to the present applicant and the allegations levelled against the applicant are baseless and false. The learned Counsel further submitted that there is no illicit relationship between the present applicant and the accused no.1 - husband of the complainant - respondent no.2. It is further submitted that the applicant is working as a teacher at Ganeshnagar in the school namely Ganesh Vidya Prasarak Mandal, Ganeshnagar, Taluka-Rahata, Dist.-Ahmednagar. She is possessing good reputation in the society. Father of the present applicant is also a teacher. Due to lodging of false complaint by respondent no.2, the reputation of the applicant is lowered down in the society and, therefore, the applicant is feeling insulted. It is further submitted that the applicant is no way connected with the complainant and her husband. There is no any previous history against the present applicant. From the recital of the F.I.R. it is seen that no any role is attributed to the present applicant. He, therefore, submitted that the application deserves to be allowed.

3. The learned Counsel for the respondent no.2 invited my attention to the contents of the F.I.R. and submitted that the present applicant is named in the F.I.R.. There are specific allegations in the complaint that the present applicant had illicit relationship with the husband of the complainant. The present applicant alongwith husband of the complainant used to abuse the complainant and used to torture mentally and physically. He submitted that this court may not interfere with the further investigation of the F.I.R. or further proceedings on the basis of the said F.I.R. He further submitted that the applicant alongwith accused Sanjay Pandit used to visit house of the deponent and used to beat her and abuse in filthy language. It is further submitted that during investigation police recorded statements of the relatives and neighbours in which all the witnesses have specifically stated about the role attributed to the present applicant. It is further submitted that the cell phone record of the applicant also shows that the present applicant and accused Sanjay Pandit used to call each other regularly and on some occasion, they used to call each other for more than 15 times a day. Investigation is almost completed and only charge-sheet has remained to be filed and, therefore, this Court may not interfere with the further investigation and filing of the proceedings on the basis of the Crime No.35/2008.

4. After hearing the learned Counsel for the applicant, the learned Counsel for the respondent no.2 and the learned A.P.P. for State and after perusal of the application including annexures and more particularly, the contents of the complaint, I am of the considered view that any further investigation or proceedings on the basis of the FIR/Crime No.35/2008 so far it relates to the present applicant will be abuse of process of law and ultimately, abuse of process of Court.

5. On perusal of the complaint, it is alleged that the applicant had illicit relations with the husband of the complainant. It is further alleged that the applicant used to come to the house of the complainant with complainant's husband and used to abuse the complainant. On careful perusal of the contents of the F.I.R., it is apparent that the applicant was not staying with the husband of complainant in his house. The applicant is working as a teacher at some other place and she has denied any illicit relationship with the complainant's husband. A conclusion cannot be drawn without any evidence that there is illicit relationship between the applicant and the husband of the complainant. Even if the case of the complainant is taken as it is that the applicant and husband of complainant used to talk on cell phone with each other, that cannot be a basis to come to the conclusion that there is necessarily illicit relationship between the complainant's husband and the applicant.

6. This matter requires consideration from another angle also. As rightly stated by the applicant, she is working as a teacher. The area in which the school is situated is rural area and ultimately, reputation of the teacher cannot be called in question by way of making wild allegations in the complaint without any sound basis. Even if all allegations in the F.I.R. are taken together, in my considered view, no offence can be made out against the present applicant. Firstly, there is no concrete basis to come to the conclusion that there is illicit relationship between the applicant and husband of the complainant. Secondly, the applicant is working as teacher at some other place and not at the same place or village where the complainant and her husband are staying. Thirdly, merely because there is conversation between the applicant and husband of the complainant on cell phone, that cannot be the basis to come to the conclusion that necessarily they have illicit relationship with each other. Fourthly, by any stretch of imagination, it is difficult to believe that the applicant used to come along with husband of the complainant to their house and abuse the complainant in her house. Fifthly, not only that the applicant is a teacher but, as rightly stated in the application, her father is also a teacher. After-all, on the basis of the F.I.R. further investigation and proceedings would proceed and same would cause damage to the reputation of the applicant in the society and ultimately, on such weak allegations in the F.I.R. the proceedings may result as a futile exercise. Therefore, viewed from any angle any further investigation on the basis of the said F.I.R. would be abuse of process of law and further proceedings on the basis of the same before the Court will be abuse of process of court. Therefore, further investigation or proceedings as the case may be based on Crime No.35/2008 registered at Shrirampur Taluka Police Station so far as it relates to the present applicant, are quashed and set aside. The application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B). Rule is made absolute accordingly.

Order accordingly.