2017 ALL MR (Cri) 2909
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)
R. M. BORDE AND A. M. DHAVALE, JJ.
Vishal s/o. Subhash Shejwal & Ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Criminal Writ Petition No.212 of 2017
13th June, 2017.
Petitioner Counsel: Mr. R.R. IMALE
Respondent Counsel: Mr. S.R. YADAV LONIKAR, Mr. R.S. JANGAM
Penal Code (1860), Ss.498A, 323, 504, 506, 34 - Constitution of India, Art.226 - Cruelty - Petition for quashing FIR - FIR lodged against maternal aunt and her husband and against maternal cousin of husband of informant - However, applicants have no connection with family of informant and her husband and are residing in separate locality - No material available against them so as to connect them with alleged crime - Vague allegations are made in FIR against them - FIR appears to have been lodged against all near relations of husband so as to drive him to arrive at terms of settlement - FIR quashed. (Paras 5, 6)
3. Petitioner no.5 is the paternal aunt of husband of informant, whereas petitioner no.6 is the husband of petitioner no.5. Petitioner no.7 is maternal cousin of husband of the informant and is presently residing at Nasik.
4. Respondent No.4 informant has lodged First Information Report with Cidco Police Station, Aurangabad, on 21.01.2017, alleging commission of offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners.
5. Petitioners No.5, 6 and 7 contend that they have absolutely no connection with the family of the informant and her husband. Petitioners No.5 and 6 are residing in separate locality and are distantly related with husband of the informant, whereas petitioner no.7 is presently residing at Nasik. It is contended that all the relations of husband have been roped in by the informant. The allegations levelled in the First Information Report are too vague and do not constitute ingredients of offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. So far as petitioners no.5, 6 and 7 are concerned, it is alleged that the illtreatment was meted out to the informant between January 2012 to August 2015 and husband of the informant was instigated by petitioners no.5, 6 and 7. The allegations levelled in the First Information Report are too vague and those, in themselves, do not satisfy ingredients of offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
6. Even otherwise, there is absolutely no material available against petitioners no.5, 6 and 7 so as to connect them with the alleged crime. The First Information Report appears to have been lodged against all near relations of the husband so as to drive husband of the informant to arrive at terms of settlement.
7. For the reasons recorded above, the petition deserves to be allowed and same is allowed to the following extent. Criminal proceedings initiated in pursuance to lodging of First Information Report bearing No.0051/2017 on 21.01.2017 at Cidco Police Station, Aurangabad, stands quashed, so far as it relates to petitioner no.5- Sow.Dropada w/o Ashok Danke, petitioner no.6Ashok s/o Namdeo Danke and petitioner no.7 Kum. Chitra d/o Sunil Shirsath.