Gujarat High Court
Ravjibhai Chaturbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 8 July, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7601/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 7601 of 2021
==========================================================
RAVJIBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VAIBHAV N SHETH(5337) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS DIVYANGNA JHALA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 08/07/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. RULE. Learned APP waives Rule for the respondent State.
2. It is to be noted that, during pendency of the petition, applicant No.1 - Ravjibhai Chaturbhai Patel has expired on 09.01.2024. Copy of death certificate is produced on record. Hence, present application stands disposed of as abetted qua applicant No.1.
3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final disposal forthwith.
4. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C."), the applicants have prayed to quash and set aside the complaint being FIR No.11215018210016 of 2021 registered with Mahila Police Station, Dist. Anand, for the offences under Sections 498- A, 323, 504 and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
Page 1 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 10 21:06:19 IST 2024NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7601/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2024 undefined
5. At the instance of respondent No.2, FIR came to be filed against the husband and family members, wherein, it is alleged that, marriage between the accused No.1 - husband and complainant wife was solemnized in the year 2011 as they were in love. It is alleged that, initially, marriage life was going smoothly and accused No.1 husband is serving and residing at Africa since 1998. However, after some time, accused No.1 was not keeping her well and quarreled with her. It is also alleged that, in-laws have instigated accused No.1 to cause mental and physical harassment and thereby, all the accused have committed an offence. In this regard, FIR came to be filed.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that, the allegations levelled against the applicants are nothing, but an abuse of process of law and without any specific instance, they have been arraigned as accused; applicant No.2 and 3 are younger and elder brother of accused No.1 husband and they did not reside together as accused No.1 was residing at Africa since 1998. Further, the applicants are residing separately and the applicants have not played any role as alleged against them. He further submitted that, the dispute arose between the husband and wife due to marital discord, however, all the family members are implicated in the FIR. Even the allegations levelled against the applicants do not prima facie disclose the involvement of the applicants in the alleged offence because the applicants are residing separately. The allegations are only to cause mental and physical harassment, except this, no any specific averment is made against the applicants. Further, the allegations made by the complainant are vague and general in nature. Even no any allegation of injury, insult or abetment being made. He further submitted that, the applicants have no any past antecedent. Therefore, without disclosing their Page 2 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 10 21:06:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7601/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2024 undefined active involvement in the alleged offence, the applicants have been arraigned as accused in FIR.
Considering the above contentions, Mr.Sheth prays to allow present application and quash the FIR against the applicants, as prayed for, in this application.
7. Learned APP appearing for the respondent-State has opposed the present application and contended that, the applicants have committed an offence by causing mental and physical harassment and also induced accused No.1 husband and in-laws to beat the complainant. It is alleged that, the applicants herein used to come at matrimonial home of the complainant and instigated the in-laws to cause mental and physical harassment upon the complainant. Therefore, prima facie involvement of the applicants is established and therefore, present application may not be entertained.
8. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and going through the allegations levelled against the applicants, it prima facie appears that, marriage between the accused No.1 and complainant took place in the year 2011 and accused No.1 was residing at Africa as he was serving there since 1998. Further, the applicants were resided separately and allegations levelled against them are vague and general in nature. Further, the dispute arose between the husband - wife due to marital discord, which is private in nature. However, the complainant by keeping grudge, arraigned other family members in the offence. It prima facie appears that in absence of any legal evidence in support of the accusation as well as demand of dowry, there is no bar to exercise power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure relying on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajanlal & Ors., [1992 Suppl. 1 SCC Page 3 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 10 21:06:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7601/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2024 undefined 2020] and State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Vangaveeti Nagaih, reported in 2009 (12) SCC 466.
Considering the allegations levelled in a complaint, case on hand squarely falls in the category of Bhajan Lal (supra), wherein, Hon'ble Supreme Court in para held as under:-
"(7) where as criminal proceedings is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
9. In Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 741, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as under:-
"19. Coming to the facts of this case, when the contents of the FIR is perused, it is apparent that there are no allegations against Kumari Geeta Mehrotra and Ramji Mehrotra except casual reference of their names who have been included in the FIR but mere casual reference of the names of the family members in a matrimonial dispute without allegation of active involvement in the matter would not justify taking cognizance against them overlooking the fact borne out of experience that there is a tendency to involve the entire family members of the household in the domestic quarrel taking place in a matrimonial dispute specially if it happens soon after the wedding.
20. It would be relevant at this stage to take note of an apt observation of this Court recorded in the matter of G.V. Rao vs. L.H.V. Prasad & Ors. reported in (2000) 3 SCC 693 wherein also in a matrimonial dispute, this Court had held that the High Court should have quashed the complaint arising out of a matrimonial dispute wherein all family members had been roped into the matrimonial litigation which was quashed and set aside. Their Lordships observed therein with which we entirely agree that:
"there has been an outburst of matrimonial dispute in recent times. Marriage is a sacred ceremony, main purpose of which is to enable the young couple to settle Page 4 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 10 21:06:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7601/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2024 undefined down in life and live peacefully. But little matrimonial skirmishes suddenly erupt which often assume serious proportions resulting in heinous crimes in which elders of the family are also involved with the result that those who could have counselled and brought about rapprochement are rendered helpless on their being arrayed as accused in the criminal case. There are many reasons which need not be mentioned here for not encouraging matrimonial litigation so that the parties may ponder over their defaults and terminate the disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in a court of law where it takes years and years to conclude and in that process the parties lose their "young" days in chasing their cases in different courts." The view taken by the judges in this matter was that the courts would not encourage such disputes.
21. In yet another case reported in AIR 2003 SC 1386 in the matter of B.S. Joshi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Anr. it was observed that there is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XXA containing Section 498A in the Indian Penal Code was to prevent the torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498A was added with a view to punish the husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. But if the proceedings are initiated by the wife under Section 498A against the husband and his relatives and subsequently she has settled her disputes with her husband and his relatives and the wife and husband agreed for mutual divorce, refusal to exercise inherent powers by the High Court would not be proper as it would prevent woman from settling earlier. Thus for the purpose of securing the ends of justice quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It would however be a different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether to exercise or not to exercise such a power."
10. The applicants are facing charge of Section 498-A of IPC. Therefore, as per the allegations made in the complaint, ingredient of Section 498A is made out. In this regard, it would be apposite to refer the decisions of the Apex Court in cases of Achin Gupta Vs. State of Haryana & Anr. Reported in 2024 INSC 369, Page 5 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 10 21:06:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7601/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2024 undefined Abhishek Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2023INSC779 / (Criminal Appeal No. 1457 of 2015), Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of UP, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 741 and Preeti Gupta and another Vs. State of Jharkhand and another [(2010) 7 SCC 667], wherein, it is observed that "......the tendency to implicate the husband and all his immediate relations is also not uncommon in complaints filed under Section 498A IPC. It was observed that the Courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases, as allegations of harassment by husband's close relations, who were living in different cities and never visited or rarely visited the place where the complainant resided, would add an entirely different complexion and such allegations would have to be scrutinized with great care and circumspection".
Considering the above principles, it appears that the applicants being younger and elder brothers of the husband, arraigned as accused with an ulterior motive, which would cause unnecessary harassment to the applicants.
So far allegations under Section 323 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 is concerned, no any assault or injury made by the applicants and therefore, the offence under Section 323 of IPC is not made out.
So far allegations under Section 504 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 is concerned, as the applicants were residing separately, question does not arise to give provocation to husband which would break the public peace and therefore, the offence under Section 323 of IPC is not made out
11. Even otherwise, husband and wife have settled the dispute and entered into divorce deed, wherein it is stated that, both the Page 6 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 10 21:06:19 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/7601/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2024 undefined parties have no any dispute against each other and in pursuance of this divorce deed, whatever cases and litigation and proceedings initiated by either party, will be withdrawn. It is further stated that, both the husband and wife are free to remarry and impugned FIR is required to be withdrawn against the accused persons. This additional ground is also taken into consideration. Even otherwise, on merit also, this is a clear cut case of vague and general allegations and no active participation is made out on the part of the applicants.
12. In view of the above, this Court is of considered view that without any specific instance or evidence, the applicants have been arraigned as accused only with an oblique motive. This Court is of further view that if the proceedings are allowed to continue against the applicants, the same will be nothing short of abuse of process of law and travesty of justice and therefore, this is a fit case to exercise inherent power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashing of criminal proceedings.
13. For the foregoing reasons and observations, present application is allowed. The impugned complaint being FIR No.11215018210016 of 2021 registered with Mahila Police Station, Dist. Anand as well as all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicants herein. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) SUCHIT Page 7 of 7 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 10 21:06:19 IST 2024