Partly allowed

Kisan S/O. Vithoba Kamble and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC25 Jun 2018APPLN/5574/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the FIR and charge-sheet against appellants Nos. 8 and 9 alleging cruelty by a married sister and brother-in-law, finding allegations vague and insufficient for Section 498-A, while rejecting the application against other family members.

What did the court decide?

The FIR (Crime No. 382/2017) and Charge-Sheet (No. I-189/2017) were quashed to the extent of Applicant Nos. 8 and 9.

Kisan S/O. Vithoba Kamble and Others Vs the State of… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

Appln5574-17.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5574 OF 2017

¶4

1. Kisan s/ Vithoba Kamble Age 65 years, Occu: Retired,

¶5

... Applicants (Orig.Accused)

¶6

2. Rajamati w/o Kisan Kamble Age 60 years, Occu: Housewife

¶7

3. Vijay s/o Kisan Kamble Age 40 years, Occu: Busienss

¶8

4. Ashwini w/o Vijay Kamble Age 35 years, Occu: Houewife

¶9

5. Dhananjay s/o Kisan Kamble Age 38 years, Occu: Business

¶10

6. Varsha Dhananjay Kamble Age 30 years, Occu: Housewife

¶11

7. Ajay Kisan Kamble, Age 36 years, Occu: Service All R/o Plot No.35, Gat No.148, Chandrashekhar Nagar, Satara Parisar, Aurangabad.

¶12

8. Neeta w/o Ratan Gaikwad Age 43 years, Occu: Service R/o Flat No.2, Varma Park Kaspatewasti, Wakad, Pune.

¶13

9. Ratan s/o Bapurao Gaikwad, Age 48 years, Occu: service, R/o Flat No.2, Varma Park Kaspatewasti, Wakad, Pune.

¶14

VERSUS

¶15

1. The State of Maharashtra Through Satara Police Station, Satara Parisar, Aurangabad Taluka & Dist. Aurangabad

¶16

1/6

¶17

Appln5574-17.odt

¶18

2. Virbala w/o Ajay Kamble ... Respondents Age 36 years,Occu: Service R/o C/o Shriniwas Ahire, Agasti Colony, CIDCO N-9, Aurangabad,Tq.&Dist. Aurangabad

¶19

Mr. Sanghmitra Wadmare, Advocate for the applicants
Mr. P. G. Borade, APP for the respondent State.
Ms. Puja V. Langhe, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶20

CORAM:T. V. NALAWADE AND
K. L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE::25th June, 2018

¶21

JUDGMENT ( Per K. L. Wadane,J.):

¶22

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the

¶23

consent of the parties, the application is taken up for
final hearing.

¶24

2. The application is filed under section 482 of

¶25

the Code of Criminal Procedure for relief of quashing
of first information report bearing Crime No. 382/2017
registered with Satara Police Station, Aurangabad, Tq.
& Dist. Aurangabad for the offence punishable under
Section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian
Penal Code. By way of amendment, the applicants have
also challenged Charge-Sheet No.I-189/2017 filed before
the Ld. C.J.M. Aurangabad and prayed for quashing the
same.

¶26

3. Respondent No.2/original complainant lodged

¶27

2/6

¶28

Appln5574-17.odt first information report against the present applicants on 3.08.2017 alleging that she was married to applicant No.7 Ajay Kamble on 04.12.2011 and started living with her husband. It is alleged that she was treated well by applicants initially for 7/8 months. Applicant Nos. 1 to 7 are residing together at Satara Parisar, Aurangabad. It is alleged that the applicants started insulting and ill-treating the complainant on trivial issues. They asked the complainant to bring Rs. 5 lakh

¶29

from her parents for construction of house and in
pursuance to the demand, applicants started ill-
treating the complainant, they used to beat her and
harass her physically and mentally and she was kept
without food. With these allegations, offence came to
be registered against the applicants accused for the
offences punishable under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506
read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶30

4. Heard Mr. Sanghmitra Wadmare, learned for the
applicants, Mr. P. G. Borade, learned APP for the
respondent State and Ms. Puja V. Langhe, learned
counsel for respondent No.2.

¶31

5. On perusal of the contents of the first

¶32

information report it appears that specific allegation

¶33

3/6

¶34

Appln5574-17.odt

¶35

of demand of money, ill-treatment and harassment are
made against applicant Nos. 1 to 7 who are residing
jointly. Applicant Nos. 1 to 2 are father and mother
of applicant No.7-husband whereas applicant Nos. 3 to 7
are his brothers and their wives, respectively. There
are specific allegations against them that they have
harassed the complainant and kept her without food,
taken her ornaments and were beating her in pursuance
of demand of money.

¶36

6. From the record, it appears that Applicant No. 8
is married sister of applicant No.7-husband and
applicant No.9 is husband of applicant No.8.
Allegation against them is that time and again they
were instigating her husband against the complainant

¶37

and were abusing the complainant. It appears that
applicant Nos. 8 and 9, both are in service and are
residing separately at Pune, and they have no direct
concern with the family affairs of the applicants 1 to
7 and complainant.

¶38

7. On perusal of the first information report, it
appears that there is no material particular quoting
any specific incident of visit or about ill-treatment
or harassment against applicant Nos. 8 and 9 so as to

¶39

4/6

¶40

Appln5574-17.odt

¶41

attract ingredients of section 498-A of the Indian
Penal Code. Allegations against applicant Nos. 8 and 9
in the first information report are vague and general
in nature. No specific act or overt-act is attributed
to them. There is no specific instance or material
particular which would strengthen the allegation of the
complainant that there was harassment or ill-treatment
at the hands of applicant Nos. 8 and 9. On its face,
the complaint does not constitute any offence against
applicant Nos. 8 and 9. Hence, to prevent the abuse
of process of law, we find that discretion needs to be
exercised in respect of Applicant Nos. 8 and 9. Hence

¶42

following order:

¶43

O R D E R

¶44

i. Application of applicant Nos. 8 Neeta w/o Ratan Gaikwad and Applicant No.9 Ratan s/o Baurao Gaikwad is hereby allowed.

¶45

ii.First information report bearing Crime No. 382/2017
registered with Satara Police Station, Aurangabad,
Tq. & Dist.Aurangabad and Charge-Sheet No.I-
189/2017 filed before the Ld. C.J.M. Aurangabad
for the offence punishable under Section 498-A,
323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code

¶46

5/6

¶47

Appln5574-17.odt are hereby quashed and set aside to the extent of Applicant Nos. 8 to 9.

¶48

iii. Application of Applicant Nos. 1 to 7 is
rejected.
iv.Rule is made partly absolute in the above terms.
(K. L. WADANE, J.) (T. V. NALAWADE, J.)
JPC

¶49

6/6

Kisan S/O. Vithoba Kamble and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kisan S/O. Vithoba Kamble and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prashant S/O. Namdeo Wagh and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Balu S/O. Arjun Jadhav and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Parasram S/O. Lalsing Rathod and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rameshwar Dadasaheb Bawle and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Anant S/O Shrinivasrao Vaidya Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Rukhmaji S/O. Tanaji Sakhare Vs the State of Maharashtra