Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Sakhubai Govind Hake And Ors vs The Sr Police Inspector And Ors on 3 January, 2024

Bench: Anuja Prabhudessai, N. R. Borkar

2024:BHC-AS:1760-DB

                                                                                   31-apl-638-23.doc


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                 APPLICATION NO. 638 OF 2023

                 1.       Mrs. Sakhubai G. Hake
                 2.       Mrs. Yashoda R. Satgire
                 3.       Mrs. Janabai G. Hake @
                          Janabai Vilas Naik
                 4.       Mrs. Mukta G. Shrirame
                 5.       Mr. Ganpat Shrirame
                 6.       Mrs. Geeta H. Shrirame
                 7.       Mr. Anand Shrimane                        ...Applicants
                                Versus
                 1.       The Sr. Police Inspector
                          Rabale Police Station, New Mumbai
                 2.       The State of Maharashtra
                 3.       Mrs. Devyani D. Hake                      ...Respondents


                 Mr. Mateen Shaikh for the Applicants.
                 Ms M.M. Deshmukh, APP for the Respondent/State.
                 Mr. Sachin Rajepandhare for Respondent No.3.

                                         CORAM   :   SMT ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI &
                                                     N. R. BORKAR, JJ.
                                         DATED   :   3 JANUARY 2024
                 PC:-

                 1.       The present application under Section 482 of Code of
                 Criminal Procedure, 1973 is fled to quash the First Information
                 Report No.196 of 2021 dated 11 June 2021 registered at Rabale
                 Police Station, New Mumbai for the ofences punishable under
                 Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal
                 Code.


                 2.       The aforesaid crime came to be registered at the instance
                 of respondent No.3/complainant. The applicant No.1 is the


                      Dinesh S. Sherla                                                 1/5




                ::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2024                ::: Downloaded on - 28/01/2024 12:29:32 :::
                                                                      31-apl-638-23.doc


 mother-in-law and applicant Nos.2,3,4 and 6 are sisters-in-law
 of respondent No.3. Applicant No.5 is the husband of applicant
 No.4 and the applicant No.7 is the father-in-law of applicant
 No.6.


 3.       The marriage of respondent No.3 was solemnized with the
 son of applicant No.1 on 11 May 2015. There are allegations of
 demand of dowry against the husband and father-in-law. As
 regards the present applicant, it is alleged that after marriage,
 when the respondent No.3 came to cohabit with them, they
 were compelling her to do all household chores. On trivial
 issue, they used to quarrel with her. There are allegations of
 unlawful demand of money against the husband, father-in-law
 and mother-in-law (applicant No.1). It is alleged that they
 demanded Rs.19 Lakhs for purchasing new house and when
 the said demand was not met, they ill-treated the respondent
 No.3.


 4.       We         have heard the learned counsel for the applicants,
 learned counsel for respondent No.3 and learned APP for
 respondent/State.


 5.       The learned counsel for the applicants submits that
 respondent No.3 has made vague and general allegations
 against the applicants, which even if accepted in their entirety
 would not constitute ofence under Section 498-A of IPC. It is
 submitted that the respondent No.3 has implicated not only her
 married sisters-in-law but their in-laws also. By drawing our


      Dinesh S. Sherla                                                   2/5




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2024                  ::: Downloaded on - 28/01/2024 12:29:32 :::
                                                                         31-apl-638-23.doc


 attention to the order passed by this Court dated 21 December
 2021 in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1726 of 2021, the
 learned counsel for the applicants submits that the respondent
 No.3 has agreed to withdraw the allegations against her
 sisters-in-law and their in-laws.


 6.       On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.3
 submits that there is prima facie material to indicate that the
 applicants had subjected her to cruelty. It is submitted that the
 applicants cannot take beneft of the order passed by this
 Court dated 21 December 2021 as after passing of the said
 order when the respondent No.3 went cohabit with the
 applicants, she was abused and driven out. It is thus submitted
 that the application be dismissed.


 7.       The order passed by this Court dated 21 December 2021
 reads thus:
          1]      Complainant wife along with her father is personally
          present in the court.
          2]      Mediator Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, after communicating with
          the complainant submits that complainant is residing with the
          applicant who is an academician. Counsel for the complainant
          assures that complainant shall cohabit with the applicant and
          shall also co-operate with him in discharge of his parental duties.
          3]      In the aforesaid background, counsel for the complainant
          on instructions from the complainant who is present in the court
          consents for deletion of all allegations against sister of the
          applicant and her in-laws and other relatives. As such,
          investigation ofcer shall take appropriate steps.
          4]      The aforesaid assurance on the part of the complainant is
          appreciated particularly in the matter of her bona fde attempt in
          reuniting with the applicant.
          5]      In the aforesaid background, ad interim protection stands
          confrmed.
                 (i)     In the event of arrest of applicant in C.R. No.
                 196/2021 registered with Rabale Police Station, he shall be
                 released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of

      Dinesh S. Sherla                                                      3/5




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2024                     ::: Downloaded on - 28/01/2024 12:29:32 :::
                                                                          31-apl-638-23.doc


                 Rs.500/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.
           6]     Counsel for the applicant is at liberty to produce copy of this
           order to the investigating ofcer for taking appropriate steps in the
           matter of investigation.
           7]     Application alongwith intervention application stand disposed
           of."
                                                  (emphasis supplied)

 8.        It is apparent from the above order that a solemn
 statement was made before this Court that the allegations
 against sisters-in-law and their in-laws would be withdrawn. Be
 that as it may, we have perused the frst information report.
 The allegations of cruelty and demand of dowry are essentially
 against the husband. The allegations against the applicants are
 that they were compelling the respondent No.3 to do all
 household chores. They used to frequently quarrel with her on
 trivial issue. Though there are allegations of demand against
 the applicant No.1, however, the same are vague. The
 allegations against the applicants even if accepted in their
 entirety would not constitute cruelty within the meaning of
 Section 498-A of the IPC.


 9.        In Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam and ors. vs. State
 of Bihar and ors.1 as well as in Abhishek Vs. State of
 Madhya Pradesh2, the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to
 previous decisions wherein concern was expressed over the
 misuse of Section 498A of IPC and the increased tendency of
 implicating relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes,
 without analyzing the long term ramifcations of a trial on the
 complainant as well as the accused. The Apex Court cautioned

 1    (2022) 6 SCC 599
 2    2023 Livelaw SC 731

       Dinesh S. Sherla                                                      4/5




::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2024                      ::: Downloaded on - 28/01/2024 12:29:32 :::
                                                                             31-apl-638-23.doc


 that false implication by way of general omnibus allegations
 made in the course of matrimonial dispute, if left unchecked
 would result in misuse of the process of law and has warned
 the Courts from proceedings against the relatives and in-laws
 of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against
 them. The Apex Court also emphasized that a criminal trial
 leading to an eventual acquittal also inflicts severe scars upon
 the       accused            and   such   an   exercise     must       therefore         be
 discouraged.


 10.       Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in
 our view, it is a ft case to exercise the powers under Section
 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the FIR qua the
 applicants. Hence, the following order is passed.


                                           ORDER

A] The Criminal Application is allowed.

B] The C.R. No. 196 of 2021 dated 11 June 2021 registered at Rabale Police Station, New Mumbai for the ofences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code is quashed qua the applicants.

C] The Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

(N.R. BORKAR, J.) (SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) Dinesh S. Sherla 5/5 ::: Uploaded on - 15/01/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 28/01/2024 12:29:32 :::