Inderdev So Laxmichand Ghanshani vs Sonam W/O Vikram Ghanshani and Others

¶1

2025:BHC-NAG:15157-DB

¶2

1 54.apl.324.25.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 324/2025

¶5

Inderdev s/o. Laxminchand Ghanshani and Ors.

¶6

Vs.

¶7

Sonam w/o. Vikram Ghanshani and Ors.

¶8

….…........................................................................................................................... . Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order or directions and Registrar's orders

¶9

........................................................................................................................................……….. Mr. J. S. Chilotra, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. Rutvik Bhalerao, Advocate (Appointed) for Non-applicants.

¶10

CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J. DATED : 06.05.2026

¶11

The applicants have filed this application for quashing the proceedings under the provisions of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (D. V. Act) bearing Case No.326/2024, pending before the Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amravati.

¶12

Non-applicant No. 1 has filed proceedings under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act against her husband and his family members. Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of Non-applicant No. 1, while Applicant Nos. 3 and 4 are her sisters-in-law.

¶13

The marriage between Non-applicant No. 1 and her husband was solemnized in the year 2010, and they have one son and one daughter out of the said wedlock. Since 29.10.2024, Non-applicant No. 1 has been residing with her parents after leaving the matrimonial home. In the complaint, she has alleged that her husband and his family members harassed her. The only specific allegation made

¶14

2 54.apl.324.25.odt

¶15

against the applicants is that they compelled her to do household work like a maid and treated her as a maid. No other specific allegations have been made against them

¶16

The learned Counsel for the applicants submitted that Non-applicant No. 1 and her husband were residing separately from the present applicants. Applicant No. 3 is a married sister-in-law, who has returned to reside at her parental home, while Applicant No. 4 is an unmarried sister-in-law residing with her parents.

¶17

It is further submitted that all the applicants were living separately from Non-applicant No. 1. Apart from the general allegations stated in the complaint, no specific allegations have been made against the Applicants.

¶18

The learned Counsel for the Non-applicants raised objection to quash the proceedings filed under the D.V. Act against these applicants as it will be considered at the time of the trial.

¶19

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned Counsel for the non-applicants.

¶20

After perusing the complaint filed by Nonapplicant No. 1, it appears that she has made certain allegations against her husband regarding physical and mental harassment. However, there is no specific statement in the complaint showing that she resided with the present applicants at any point of time. It appears that, after the marriage, Non-applicant No. 1 and her husband were residing separately from the applicants.

¶21

The only allegation made against the applicants is that they treated her like a maid and made her do

¶22

3 54.apl.324.25.odt

¶23

household work. The married sister-in-law have also been impleaded as parties, though they were not residing with Non-applicant No. 1.

¶24

Considering the nature of the allegations made against the present applicants, prima facie, a case is made out for quashing the proceedings initiated against them under the Domestic Violence Act.

¶25

Hence, the application is allowed.

¶26

The proceedings filed under the provisions of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 bearing Case No.326/2024, pending before the Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Amravati, is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶27

( MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI , J.)

¶28

RGurnule

¶29

Signed by: Mrs. R.M. MANDADE Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 07/05/2026 17:52:00

Inderdev So Laxmichand Ghanshani v. Sonam W/O Vikram Ghanshani and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Inderdev So Laxmichand Ghanshani v. Sonam W/O Vikram Ghanshani and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Neeraj S/O Naresh Agrawal vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Bhandara Tq. and Dist. Bhandara and Another

Ashok S/O Champalal Agrawal vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps Bhandara, Tq. and Dist. Bhandara and Another

Mahendra @ Vijaybharti S/O Vasantrao Gajbhiye vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso, Ps Jaripatka, Nagpur and Other.

Vinay Radheshyam Bhattad vs State of Maharashtra

Girdharilal Rameshwar Sarda vs State of Maharashtra, through Inspector of Metrology, Washim Division, Washim

Vinod Shivkumar vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso. Ps. Dharni, Tq. Achalpur, Dist. Amravati