ORDER : 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellants before this Court are husband (Appellant No. 2), mother-in-law (Appellant No. 1) and the sister-in-law (Appellant No. 3) of Respondent No. 2 – Nandita Mandar Mainkar. 3. The marriage of Appellant No. 2 and Respondent No. 2 was solemnized on 09.07.2012 and after some time, marital discord occurred between the parties. We have been informed at the Bar that the parties are living separately since 2016. 4. In the meanwhile, an FIR has been lodged against the appellants on 10.05.2019 under Sections 498, 313, 323 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the date has an important bearing inasmuch as a few days prior to that, i.e. on 06.05.2019, the appellant had initiated Divorce proceedings against the respondent by filing a suit for Dissolution of Marriage before the Family Court at Pune. Therefore, apparently, the criminal proceedings initiated at the hands of the complainant – wife seems to be nothing but a counterblast to the Divorce proceedings initiated by the appellant or at least, it is the immediate cause thereof. 5. There are allegations in the FIR for commission of offence under 498, 313 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, not only against the husband, but also against the father-in-law. 6. The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been partly allowed by the High Court vide impugned order dated 05.09.2023, quashing the proceedings only against the father-in-law. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the other three appellants have approached this Court in the present appeal. 7. One glaring fact which the High Court has not considered at all in its order dated 05.09.2023 passed in the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is that the FIR itself was lodged after a long delay of more than six years, particularly under the offence u/s 313 I.P.C. Section 313 I.P.C. reads as under : “313. Causing miscarriage without woman’s consent.— Whoever commits the offence defined in the last preceding section without the consent of the woman, whether the woman is quick with child or not, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.” 8. Causing miscarriage without woman’s consent.— Whoever commits the offence defined in the last preceding section without the consent of the woman, whether the woman is quick with child or not, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.” 8. However, the available evidence which is already there in the lis shows that this was not a case of Section 313 I.P.C., but it was an unfortunate case of miscarriage and medical evidence as well as in the form of Doctor’s report are available. Moreover, the inordinate delay in lodging of the FIR is also important. Regarding other offences viz. Section 498 I.P.C., they are vague and omnibus and so is the allegation under Section 323 I.P.C. This is nothing more than an abuse of process of law at the hands of the respondent. It is such cases, which require interference by the High Court for exercising its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the proceedings so that the accused persons do not have to face criminal proceedings unnecessarily. 9. Considering the facts and the nature of the case and the evidence brought on record by the prosecution, we have absolutely no doubt in our mind that proceedings ought to be quashed. The criminal proceedings pending against petitioner under Sections 498, 313, 323 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code before the concerned trial court are hereby quashed. 10. In view of above, the appeal is allowed. 11. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is/are disposed of.