Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 794 (BOM)

Ashok Mahadu Patil v. State of Maharashtra

2015-03-20

I.K.JAIN, T.V.NALAWADE

body2015
Judgment Smt. I.K. Jain, J. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard both sides for final disposal. Learned AP.P. is also heard. 2. The proceeding is filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing FIR in Crime No.157 of 2014 registered at Parola Police Station, Parola for the offences punishable under sections 498-A, 420, 406, 313, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The proceeding is in narrow compass. Vide order dated 1st October, 2014 this Court rejected the application filed by Applicant Nos.1 to 4 and 8. We have heard the parties only in respect to Applicant Nos. 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10. 4. The crime is registered on the basis of report lodged by Respondent No.2 Priyanka Dinesh Patil. Priyanka married to Dinesh on 18th February, 2014 as per Hindu customary rites. Applicants 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 are original accused Nos. 6, 7, 8, 10 and 11. They are the relatives of husband of complainant. 5. It is the case of the complainant/ wife that after 15 days of marriage she was ill-treated by her husband, in-laws and other relatives on the demand of Rs.7 Lakh for purchasing a flat at Surat. Thereafter, she was sent to her maternal home. On 9th March, 2014 her father and other relatives brought her to village Janve. They pacified the accused. After 1-2 days again accused started demanding money from the complainant. It is alleged that on the instigation of husband accused Nos.2 to 11 removed her Stridhan and threatened not to return the same till the demand of money is fulfilled. Accused were also threatening her to life. According to complainant on 23rd March, 2014 she was driven out of the house. So, she went to her maternal home. On 20th April, 2014 accused obtained her signature on some paper by committing breach of trust under the pretext that it was necessary for her medical treatment. She was carrying 1-1/2 months pregnancy and keeping her in dark accused got her aborted. On 7th May, 2014 accused Nos.1 to 11 had been to Mondhale and demanded divorce. They insisted to either fulfill demand of money or sign on blank paper. That time she and her father were abused and beaten. They were rescued by other people. She was carrying 1-1/2 months pregnancy and keeping her in dark accused got her aborted. On 7th May, 2014 accused Nos.1 to 11 had been to Mondhale and demanded divorce. They insisted to either fulfill demand of money or sign on blank paper. That time she and her father were abused and beaten. They were rescued by other people. On 22nd June, 2014 complainant lodged report to Parola Police Station as indicated above. 6. Applicant No.5 (Accused No.6) and Applicant No.10 (Accused No.11) cousins of husband of complainant reside separately. Applicant Nos.6 and 7 (Accused Nos.7 and 8) real brothers are serving in Army. Certificates have been placed on record to show that Applicant Nos.6, 7 and 10 are in service and do not reside at village Janve, Taluka Amalner, Jalgaon. Applicant No.9 wife of Applicant No.7 resides with her husband separately. 7. On perusal of FIR it can be seen that vague allegations are made against Applicant Nos. 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10. FIR if taken in its entirety on its face does not constitute any offence against these applicants. No specific role is attributed to each of them. Nothing can be achieved if charge sheet is filed against Applicant Nos. 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 (Accused Nos. 6, 7, 8, 10 and 11). To prevent the abuse of process of law we find that discretion under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure needs to be exercised in respect to these applicants. 8. In the result, application is partly allowed to the extent of Applicant Nos.5 Soni @ Jyoti Namdeo patil, 6 Sharad Ashok Patil @ Kakulith, 7 Samadhan Ashok Patil, 9 Seema Samadhan Patil, and 10 Sushil Namdeo patil. In consequence FIR bearing Crime No.157 of 2014 registered as Parola Police Station for the offences punishable under sections 498-A, 420, 406, 313, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code is hereby quashed and set aside to the extent of above applicants. 9. Rule is made partly absolute in the aforesaid terms.