Partly allowed

Sajjad Ansar Ali Saiyyad and 7 Another v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Wadgaon (Jungle) Dist.Yavatmal and Another

Bombay HC13 Sept 2024APL/791/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal APL, the High Court of Nagpur examined a petition seeking to quash an FIR under Sections 498-A, 504, and 506 IPC. The husband was charged with domestic harassment while his in-laws faced accusations of supporting him. The Court distinguished the roles, holding that while the husband faced sufficient grounds for prosecution, the general and vague allegations against the in-laws lac

What did the court decide?

The FIR is quashed to the extent of applicants Nos. 2 to 8 (in-laws), while the application regarding applicant No. 1 (husband) is rejected.

Sajjad Ansar Ali Saiyyad and 7 Another Vs the State… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

30 apl 791.24

¶2

2024:BHC-NAG:10458-DB

¶3

Judgment

¶4

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY : NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

¶6

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 791/2024

¶7

Sajjad Ansar Ali Saiyyad (Husband), aged about 32 yrs., Occ. Private,

¶8

Ansar Ali Saiyyad (Father-in-law), Aged about 59 yrs., Occ. Business,

¶9

Shamimbanu Ansar Ali Sayyad (mother-in-law) Aged about 55 yrs., Occ. Housewife,

¶10

Nazim Ansar Ali Saiyyad (Borther-in-law) aged about 34 yrs., Occ. –

¶11

Rukhsar Nazim Saiyyad (sister-in-law) aged about 30 yrs., Occ. Household, All Applicant Nos. 1 to 5 R/o. Kataria Layout, Ralegaon, Tah. Ralegaon, Dist. Yavatmal.

¶12

Salma Sohebuddin Sheikh (sister-in-law) aged about 35 yrs., Occ. Household, R/o. near Masjid, Asi Nagar, Teka, Nagpur.

¶13

Asma Wasim Mirza (sister-in-law) aged about 30 yrs., Occ. Household,

¶14

Wasim Karim Mirza (brother-in-law) aged about 35 yrs., Occ. Business, Nos. 7 & 8 both are R/o. Babhulgaon, Dist. Yavatmal. ... APPLICANTS

Judgment

30 apl 791.24

VERSUS

State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer, Police Station, Wadgaon (Jungle) Dist. Yavatmal.

¶20

Nargis Sajjad Saiyyad Parveen, Aged about 28 yrs., Occ. Household, R/o. C/o. Hamidkha Pathan,

¶21

Akola Bazar, Tq. & Dist. Yavatmal.

¶22

… NON-APPLICANTS

¶23

Mr. A. Dhore, Advocate with Mr. Y.S. Bangale, Advocate for applicants. Mrs. M. Deshmukh, APP for non-applicant No.1.

¶24

CORAM : VINAY JOSHI AND

¶25

MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.

¶26

DATE : 13.09.2024.

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: VINAY JOSHI, J.) :

¶28

Heard.

¶29

Admit .

¶30

Though informant lady served, she chose to remain absent.

Judgment

30 apl 791.24

By this application, the applicants who are husband and relatives of husband are seeking to quash First Information Report (“FIR”) vide Crime No. 77/2024 registered with Police Station Wadgaon (Jungle), Dist. Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶35

At the instance of report dated 11.03.2024 lodged by nonapplicant No.2, crime has been registered. It is informant’s case that after marriage, for initial few days, she was treated well by her husband and in-laws, however later, she was subjected to humiliation and harassment on flimsy ground. The informant stated that all the relatives used to support and instigate her husband to harass her. It is her contention that her husband used to chat with some other ladies and when questioned, he used to beat, abuse and harass her. The husband was also raising monetary demand. Rest of the applicants also harassed her by raising demand and therefore, the report.

Judgment

30 apl 791.24

The learned counsel appearing for applicants would submit that reading of Police Paper indicates that entire allegations are vague and general. The informant has not stated date, occasion or period when she harassed. Particularly, it is argued that besides general statement, the role of either of relative has not been specified in the police report. The learned counsel for applicants relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in cases of Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors. AIR 2022 SC 820 SC and Preeti Gupta and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr., AIR 2010 SC 3363 SC to contend that the tendency of implicating relatives of the husband on vague allegation is common. In absence of specific allegation, the relatives of husband cannot be implicated in matrimonial dispute. Moreover, the applicants placed reliance on the decision of this Court in case of Samad Habib Mithani & ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & anr. (Criminal Application [APL] No. 1241/2014, decided on 25.07.2024) to contend that the allegation against relatives that they support the husband would not be a ground to implicate the relatives.

Judgment

30 apl 791.24

In the light of above, by applying the law as aforementioned, we have re-examined the entire material. It reveals that within short span of three years, the matrimonial life was disturbed. Apart from the physical assault, she has also stated that husband was having intimacy with some other lady. On said count, he used to physically assault her. Certainly, these complaints are restricted to the husband only. The learned APP has also pointed that there are statements which indicate that during pregnancy, husband has assaulted the informant lady. Thus, so far as the husband is concerned, the contention about absence of prima facie material cannot be accepted. As regards to the rest of the applicants are concerned, they are relatives of the husband. The applicant Nos. 6 and 7 are married sisters of informant’s husband and applicant No.8 is husband of applicant No.7. They stay away from the informant’s husband’s house.

¶44

The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the informant has made general allegation that all applicants have abused, raised monetary demand and gave threats. In absence of specific role

Judgment

30 apl 791.24

of either of the relatives of husband, it is difficult to accept the informant’s case.

¶49

In view of above decisions, the relatives of husband cannot be dragged in the litigation on account of general and vague statement. Therefore, we do not see any prima facie material to put the relatives on trial.

¶50

In view of above, application is partly allowed. The application to the extent of applicant No.1 husband Sajjad Ansar Ali Saiyyad stands rejected. We hereby quash and set aside FIR vide Crime No. 77/2024 registered with Police Station Wadgaon (Jungle), Dist. Yavatmal for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code to the extent of applicant Nos. 2 to 8.

¶51

Application stands disposed of in above terms.

¶52

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (VINAY JOSHI, J.)

¶53

Gohane

Sajjad Ansar Ali Saiyyad and 7 Another v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Wadgaon (Jungle) Dist.Yavatmal and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajjad Ansar Ali Saiyyad and 7 Another v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Wadgaon (Jungle) Dist.Yavatmal and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Xyz (Victim) Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Amdapur Dist.Buldhana and Another

Shahezad Khan Shammi Khan vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Home Dep.(Spl) Mantralaya Mumbai and Anothr

Dipak @ Kalya S/O Sunil Singh vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Concerned Officer/Secretary Home Dep. (Special) Mumbai and 2

Dyaneshwar Kisan Nankar Vs the State of Maharashtra through Pso Ps Amdapur Dist Buldhana and Another

Mohammed Raza Qureshi S/O Riyaj Mohammed Qureshi and Another vs the State of Maharashtra through Ps Dhantoli Ps Dhantoli Nagpur

Mohammad Mubsheer Shaikh Alias Chand S/O Shaikh Shabbir Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary and Another