Bombay High Court
Aasha W/O Satish Khade vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 15 July, 2025
Author: Vibha Kankanwadi
Bench: Vibha Kankanwadi
2025:BHC-AUG:20986-DB
1 APPLN.4503.2023.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4503 OF 2023
1. Asha w/o Satish Khade
Age: 39 years, Occ: Teacher,
R/o: Laxmi Nagar, Mandave,
Satara, District Satara.
(Sister-in-law)
2. Satish s/o Hanmant Khade
Age: 43 years, Occ: Teacher,
R/o: Laxmi Nagar, Mandave,
Satara, District Satara.
(Brother-in-law)
3. Suman w/o Nilkanth Bhange
Age: 61 years, Occ: Household,
R/o: Mahadev Galli, Murshadpur,
Ashti, Taluka Ashti District Beed.
At Present, Tuljai Chowk,
Shivaji Nagar Beed, District Beed
(Mother-in-law). ... Applicants
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Shivaji Nagar Police Station,
Beed.
2. X Y Z. ... Respondents
...
Mr. Swapnil Joshi, i/b J. P. Legal Associates, Advocate for Applicants.
Mr. G. A. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent No.1 / State.
Ms. Pratiksha Kale, h/f Mr. Vishal Kadam, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
...
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &
SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE : 15th July, 2025.
2 APPLN.4503.2023.odt
O R D E R:(Per Sanjay A. Deshmukh, J.) 1 Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties. 2 Present application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "the Cr.P.C.") initially for quashment of the FIR bearing Crime No.533 of 2023, dated 5 th October, 2023, registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 377, 323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "the IPC") and under Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013, and later on by way of amendment, for quashment of the consequential charge-sheet.
3 When this Court expressed disinclination to grant relief of quashment of report as well as the charge-sheet to applicant No.3, the learned counsel for the applicants, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw her application. Leave is granted.
4 Respondent No.2 being a woman and the offence is under Section 377 of IPC, we would like to mask her name.
3 APPLN.4503.2023.odt 5 Applicant No.1 is the sister-in-law of the informant / respondent No.2. Applicant No.2 is the husband of applicant No.1. 6 Respondent No.2 / informant averred in the report that her marriage was solemnized with co-accused - Mahesh Nilkanth Bhange on 10th July, 2015, as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. Initially, she started to reside in a joint family alongwith her husband and the parents-in-law. Her parents-in-law used to forcibly administer to her certain herbal medicines with an intention that she should not conceive. The said herbs (vine) were reportedly grown within their compound of the residence. The informant told that fact to her husband on several occasions, however, he neglected her and told her that he had no interest in living with her, as her father had not given him anything, and that he wished to marry someone else. She told that fact to her parents. They arranged for her treatment with Dr.Gholve. After nearly six years of marriage, the informant gave birth to a son. Despite this, her husband, alongwith her parents-in-law continued to harass her on trifling ground. She lodged a complaint against her husband, parents-in-law and two sisters-in-law, including applicant Nos.1 and 2 at the Women's Grievance Redressal Cell. There, compromise took place. The husband and his family gave a written assurance that she would be treated well. Therefore, the 4 APPLN.4503.2023.odt informant resumed cohabitation. After a brief period, her husband started to assault her and her parents-in-law continued their harassment.
7 The informant further averred that her husband and parents-in-law used to conduct rituals at their residence allegedly to obtain treasure trove. For this purpose, they called Baba / Maharaj to perform certain rituals involving lemons, chillies, salt, turmeric, black dolls etc. She was told by them that as she is the eldest daughter-in- law, it was mandatory for her to participate in these rituals. When she refused, they beat her and forcibly made her sit for the ritual. During these ceremonies, lemons and chillies were waved around her body. Due to the fear from these rituals, the informant fell ill. She was also threatened that if she discloses the rituals to anyone, the treasure trove would not be found.
8 The informant further averred that fed up with the continued harassment, the informant repeatedly requested her husband to separate from the joint family. Eventually, on 3 rd January, 2023, the informant, her husband, and their child started to reside separately. After about a month, her in-laws came to her and insisted that she attend another ritual at their residence. She refused, after which her husband and in-laws assaulted her.
5 APPLN.4503.2023.odt 9 The informant further averred that on 16th September, 2023, applicant Nos.1 and 2 visited her residence and told her to bear and tolerate all sufferings for two more months, after which they would receive treasure trove worth seven Hande i.e. pots of gold and that she would live like a Queen thereafter. The informant declined their proposal and told them that she only wanted to live peacefully. Thereafter, both applicants stayed at the residence of her in-laws for two days and went back.
10 The informant further averred that on 2nd October, 2023, her husband informed her that he was going out of town for business and preparations for rituals and left the house. He returned on 4 th October, 2023 at about 05:00 am. On that day, between 09:00 am to 11:00 am, her father-in-law visited her and insisted to accompany him to his house for the ritual. Upon her refusal, he started to abuse her. Her husband, who was asleep, woke up. He also insisted that she shall participate in the ritual. When she again refused, her husband slapped her and beat her with kicks and fist blows. Thereafter, both her husband and father-in-law tied her hands behind her back, gagged her mouth, and dragged her into the bedroom. There, they forcibly laid her face down on the bed, pulled her gown up, and her husband committed forcible anal intercourse upon her against her will. He took 6 APPLN.4503.2023.odt bite below her right elbow. When she resisted, her husband slapped her on her back and buttocks. Thereafter, her father-in-law committed similar acts of forcible anal intercourse. When she opposed, he threatened to kill her minor son. Thereafter, her father-in-law left the house. Her husband then untied her and threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone. Thereafter, he left the house. The informant then made phone call to her mother and narrated the entire incident. However, before she could do anything further, her husband returned and beat her again, snatched her mobile handset and took away their child. After some time, her mother arrived. Approximately half an hour later, her husband returned. Her mother confronted him regarding the incident, but he gave evasive answers. Thereafter, the informant and her mother proceeded by rickshaw to the Women's Grievance Redressal Centre at the S.P. Office. However, the designated officer was on leave. The in-charge duty officer present there noted down her name and address and instructed her husband to return the child, which he did. Thereafter, the informant, accompanied by her father approached the police station and lodged the report.
11 The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicant Nos.1 and 2 are falsely implicated in the crime. There is no cogent and acceptable evidence against them. Vague and general 7 APPLN.4503.2023.odt allegations are made against them. If applicant Nos.1 and 2 are compelled to face the trial, it would be an abuse of the process of the Court. He lastly prayed to allow the application. 12 The learned APP for the State strongly opposed the application and submitted that applicant Nos.1 and 2 are involved in a serious crime. Their names are mentioned in the report with their role. He lastly prayed to reject the application.
13 The learned counsel for the informant / respondent No.2 also strongly opposed the application. She submitted that the names of applicant Nos.1 and 2 are mentioned in the report. They are involved in a serious crime. They committed an anti-social crime. There is strong material against them. She lastly prayed to reject the application.
14 Here, it is relevant to refer to the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in Mohammad Wajid and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another, reported in, 2023 SCC Online SC 951; 2023 INSC 683, whereunder the Honourable Supreme Court held thus:-
"34. ....... it will not be just enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for the 8 APPLN.4503.2023.odt purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not. In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines. The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution need not restrict itself only to the stage of a case but is empowered to take into account the overall circumstances leading to the initiation/registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation...."
15 We have perused the charge-sheet, particularly, the report and the statements of witnesses. The witnesses have stated similar facts as stated by the informant in the report.
16 The application of applicant No.3 mother-in-law is withdrawn. Section 377 of the IPC is invoked against the husband and father-in-law of the informant. They are not party to this application. 17 There are allegations of cruelty in the report. The investigating officer has not invoked Section 498-A of the IPC. However, while framing charge, the Trial Court may frame charge under Section 498-A of the IPC. Therefore, while deciding this 9 APPLN.4503.2023.odt application, we are deciding whether cruelty is caused by applicant Nos.1 and 2 or not.
18 Admittedly, applicant Nos.1 and 2 are residing at Laxmi Nagar, Taluka Mandave, District Satara. Both are teachers by profession. There are allegations against them that they treated the informant with cruelty and forced her for performing the rituals for gaining treasure trove.
19 The informant in her report stated that initially her parents- in-law and the husband were compelling her to perform rituals and the Baba and Maharaj were called for that purpose. Their names are not disclosed by the informant. It is further alleged that applicant Nos.1 and 2 visited her residence on 16th September, 2023 and told her to bear all the sufferings for securing treasure trove. But these are vague and general allegations made against them. It is not brought on record that on 16th September, 2023, applicant Nos.1 and 2 came there to harass her from Satara and they were on leave on that day. The leave record of applicant Nos.1 and 2 is not collected by the investigating officer. Further, the so-called Baba or Maharaj are not made accused. This shows that vague allegations are made against applicant Nos.1 and 2. Thus, the essential ingredients of the Black Magic Act i.e. evil and aghori practices on the part of applicant Nos.1 and 2 by instigating 10 APPLN.4503.2023.odt are not establishing from the entire charge-sheet. The material placed on record in this regard is not sufficient to establish Black Magic and therefore, it is not justifiable to apply Section 3 of the Black Magic Act, 2013 against applicant Nos.1 and 2.
20 To establish cruelty as contemplated under Section 498-A of the IPC, it is necessary to establish its essential ingredients as defined in it that there was a demand for money or dowry, or cruelty that drives the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to her life, limb, or mental or physical health. There is no such material on record to show the overt act of applicant Nos.1 and 2 to establish cruelty caused by them.
21 It is not case of informant that applicant Nos.1 and 2 caused any injury voluntarily to the informant. There is no material to show that applicant Nos.1 and 2 intentionally insulted her with intent to provoke breach of the peace and caused criminal intimidation to the informant. The essential ingredients of Sections 323, 504 and 506 of the IPC are not establishing against them.
22 Considering entire charge-sheet, the essential ingredients of Sections 377, 323, 504 and 506 of IPC and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other 11 APPLN.4503.2023.odt Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013, are not established against applicant Nos.1 and 2.
23 Considering the general and vague allegations made against applicant Nos.1 and 2 and the law laid down in the case of Mohammad Wajid and Another (supra) as well as reasons stated above, it would certainly be an abuse of the process of the Court, if applicant Nos.1 and 2 are directed to face the trial. We are, therefore, inclined to allow the application to the extent of applicant Nos.1 and 2, by exercising our inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the interest of justice and to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court. The application, therefore, deserves to be partly allowed. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER I. The application is partly allowed.
II. The application of applicant No.3 stands dismissed as withdrawn.
III. The application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (C) and (C-1) to the extent of present applicant Nos.1 and 2 only.
[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ] nga