AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
(PER : NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.)
Heard. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties.
This is an application challenging the First Information Report No. 0379/2021, dated 07.11.2021, instituted at the behest of the non-applicant No.2 with the non-applicant No.1 – Police Station Andhera, District Buldhana, for the offence punishable under Sections 377, 498-A, 294 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The non-applicant No.2 who is the wife of the applicant No.1, lodged a report thereby alleging that her marriage with the applicant No.1 was performed on 19.05.2020. For some days, after going to her maternal home, she was treated nicely for some days. Thereafter, the applicants started harassing her on one pretext or the other. The harassment was due to the fact that the non-applicant No.2 had brought insufficient gold ornaments with her, and a demand was made for the same. The applicants, time and again, used to taunt her and used to say that it was because of her, life of applicant No.1 had been ruined. On these allegations, the First Information Report in question was lodged.
We have heard Shri Gahilot, learned Counsel for the applicants, Ms Swati Kolhe, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant No.1/State, and Shri S.A. Mohta, learned Counsel for non-applicant No.2.
Learned Counsel for the applicants states that the allegations made in the First Information Report are general in nature and are vague and omnibus. No particular role is attributed to any of the applicants, and therefore, the offence under various sections as mentioned in the First Information Report is not made out. He, therefore, prays for quashing the said First Information Report.
Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor while opposing the averments of the learned Counsel for the applicants, who opposed the same, and states that the perusal of the averments in the First Information Report is sufficient to make out the offence as mentioned in the First Information Report. She states that since there is a prima facie material against the applicants, the application is liable to be rejected. The learned Counsel for the non-applicant No.2 supports the contentions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and states that the applicants have practiced mental cruelty on the non-applicant No.2 and therefore need to be prosecuted.
We have perused the contentions advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties, as also the First Information Report and the oral complaint, which has laid the filing of the First Information Report. Before adverting to the facts in the matter, it would be apropos to cite various Judicial pronouncements of the Hon’ble Apex Court in this regard. At this stage, reference can be given in the matter of Preeti Gupta Vs. State of Jharkhand, (2010) 7 SCC 667, wherein the Apex Court observed in paragraph Nos. 30, 32, 34 as under :
“30.It is a matter of common knowledge that unfortunately matrimonial litigation is repeatedly increasing in our country. All the Courts in our country including this Court are flooded with the matrimonial cases. This really demonstrates discontent and unrest in the family life of a large number of people in the society. 31………...
32.It is the matter of common experience that most of these complaints under Section 498-A IPC are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations. We came across a large number of such complaints which are not even bona fide and as filed with oblique motive. At the same time rapid increase in the number of genuine cases of dowry harassment are also a matter of serious concern. 33…………...
34.Unfortunately, at the time of filing of complaint the implications and consequences are not properly visualized by the complainant that such complaint can lead to unsurmountable, harassment, agony and pain to the complainant, accused and his close relations.”
In that view of the matter, as far as applicant Nos. 2 to 8 are concerned, the allegations are general and omnibus in nature. No specific instances are spelled out in the First Information Report, so as to continue the prosecution against those applicants. It would therefore be a travesty of justice to continue the proceedings as far as applicant Nos. 2 to 8 are concerned. Since the application has been not pressed as far as applicant No.1 is concerned, which is observed by us in the order dated 19.01.2022. In that view of the matter, the application deserves to be allowed as far as applicant No.2 to 8 are concerned. Hence, we proceed to pass the following order :
ORDER
The application is allowed.
ii) The the First Information Report No. 0379/2021, dated 07.11.2021, registered with the non-applicant No.1 – Police Station Andhera, District Buldhana, for the offence punishable under Sections 377, 498-A, 294, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, is hereby quashed and set aside, to the extent of applicant Nos. 2- Premchand Deochand Sonune, 3- Sau. Kamalbai Premchand Sonune, 4- Sau. Maya Rajendra Chinchole, 5- Rajendra Babulal Chinchole, 6- Sagar Premchand Sonune, 7- Sangeeta Amol Patthe, 8- Amol Dhansingh Patthe.
The application is disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.