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 5, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Prachi W/O Jay Harsukhlal Chauhan @ ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 16 March, 2022

Author: V. K. Jadhav

Bench: V. K. Jadhav

                                                                       crwp923.21
                                      -1-


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                 980 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.923 OF 2021

   PRACHI W/O JAY HARSUKHLAL CHAUHAN @ PRACHI D/O MANISH
                               PARMAR
                               VERSUS
           THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                  .....
           Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Anandsingh Bayas
              APP for Respondents: Mr. R.V. Dasalkar
                                       .....

                               CORAM : V. K. JADHAV AND
                                       SANDIPKUMAR. C. MORE, JJ.
                               DATED : 16th MARCH, 2022

 PER COURT:-


 1.       By consent of the parties, heard finally at admission stage.



 2.       The petitioner is the original complainant in connection with

 crime No. 255 of 2021 registered at Pundliknagar Police Station,

 Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 420,

 406, 307, 323, 504, 506 r.w. 34 of I.P.C..



 3.       It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner got married to

 co-accused Jay Chauhan on 3.12.2020 at Aurangabad and the

 accused Jay (husband of the petitioner) is hailing from Nashik.

 According to the petitioner, the marriage of the petitioner was

 outcome of the fraud practice upon her and her parents. After the

 marriage, the petitioner went to reside at Nashik at her husband's

 house, however, as per the allegations made in the complaint, she



::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2022                    ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2022 07:20:28 :::
                                                                       crwp923.21
                                     -2-

 was physically and mentally harassed and tortured and she was

 assaulted. She was also denied the physical intimacy. After the last

 incident that was occurred on 24.4.2021, the petitioner original

 complainant started residing at her parents' house at Aurangabad. It

 further appears that so far as the allegations attracting ingredients of

 Section 307 of I.P.C. are concerned, since the said incident allegedly

 taken place in the matrimonial house situated at Nashik, the crime

 No. 255 of 2021 registered with Pundliknagar Police Station,

 Aurangabad came to be transferred to Upnagar police station,

 Nashik on 22.7.2021 and presently the same is registered as crime

 No. 121 of 2021.



 4.       Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have

 arrived at amicable settlement and the consent terms are also

 worked out. The petitioner and her husband Jay have decided to

 end their matrimonial relations forever and they have approached the

 Family Court by filing a petition bearing No. F-308 of 2021 for decree

 of divorce by mutual consent as provided under Section 13-B of

 Hindu Marriage Act.



 5.       Learned counsel submits that in view of the authoritative

 pronouncement of the Supreme Court in the case of Rupali Devi vs.

 State of Uttar Pradesh, reported in (2019) 5 SCC 384, the courts

 at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away

 from the matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed

::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2022                   ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2022 07:20:28 :::
                                                                          crwp923.21
                                       -3-

 by the husband or his relatives, would, dependent on the factual

 situation, also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging

 commission of offences under Section 498A of the Indian Penal

 Code. Learned counsel submits that in view of the same, the said

 crime number is required to be investigated and dealt with by the

 Pundliknagar police station, Aurangabad and necessary orders are

 required to be passed with regard thereto.



 6.       Learned A.P.P. appearing for all respondents submits that in

 view of the ratio laid down by the Supreme court in the case of

 Rupali Devi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (supra) appropriate order

 may be passed.



 7.       The Supreme Court in the case of Rupali Devi vs State of

 Uttar Pradesh (supra) has dealt with the following question;-



          "Whether a woman forced to leave her matrimonial home on
          account of acts and conduct that constitute cruelty can initiate
          and access the legal process within the jurisdiction of the
          courts where she is forced to take shelter with the parents or
          other family members".



          In para 15 of the said judgment, the Supreme Court has

 discussed the provisions of Section 498A of I.P.C. with the

 Explanation "A" and "B" which defines the cruelty and further

 observed that "......The consequences of the cruelty committed at the



::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2022                      ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2022 07:20:28 :::
                                                                           crwp923.21
                                        -4-

 matrimonial home results in repeated offences being committed at

 the parental home. This is the kind of offences contemplated under

 Section 179 Cr.P.C which would squarely be applicable to the

 present case as an answer to the question raised."



 8.       Thus, in para 16 of the judgment, the Supreme court has made

 following observations:-



        "16. We, therefore, hold that the courts at the place where the
        wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away from the
        matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by
        the husband or his relatives, would, dependent on the factual
        situation, also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging
        commission of offences under Section 498A of the Indian Penal
        Code."



 9.       In view of the same, the order dated 15.7.2021 passed by the

 Police Sub Inspector, Pundliknagar Police Station, Aurangabad,

 unilaterally transferring the investigation of crime No. 255 of 2021 to

 Upnagar Police Station, Nashik is liable to be quashed and set aside.

 In consequence thereof, the crime No. 255 of 2021 registered with

 Pundliknagar Police Station, Aurangabad is to be restored at its

 original number and the Pundliknagar Police Station, Aurangabad

 has to carry out further investigation in connection with the said

 crime. In view of above, we proceed to pass the following order:-




::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2022                       ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2022 07:20:28 :::
                                                                             crwp923.21
                                          -5-

                                     ORDER

I. Criminal writ petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause "B".

II. Criminal writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(SANDIPKUMAR. C. MORE, J.) (V. K. JADHAV, J.) rlj/ ::: Uploaded on - 17/03/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 18/03/2022 07:20:28 :::