JUDGMENT : A.S.Gadkari, J. 1) By this Application under Section 482 of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , 1973, Applicants, i.e. father-in-law (Applicant No.1); mother-in-law (Applicant No.2); brothers-in-law (Applicant Nos. 3 and 4) of Respondent No.3, are seeking quashing of C.R.No. 1052 of 2018, dated 6 th November, 2018, registered with Pimpri Police Station, Pune City, under Sections 498-A, 506(2), 323, 504, 506, 507 read with 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860. 2) Heard Ms. Borhade, learned Advocate for Applicants, Smt. Yadav, learned A.P.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. Shastry learned Advocate for Respondent No.3, the informant. Perused entire record produced before us. 3) Record indicates that, by an Order dated 14 th June, 2023, the Application was admitted and interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c) qua the Applicants, was granted. After service of notice, Advocate Mr.Shastry appears for Respondent No.3. 4) Mr. Shastry, learned Advocate appearing for Respondent No.3 opposed the Application and submitted that, there are certain allegations levelled against the Applicants and therefore the said crime qua the Applicants may not be quashed. 5) A minute perusal of FIR clearly indicates that, the allegations as against the Applicants are absolutely vague, omnibus and generic in nature. The major allegations are against Mr. Amol Ashok Holkunde, i.e. the husband of Respondent No.3. 6) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors. reported in (2022) 6 SCC 599 , in Para No.17 has held as under :- “17.The abovementioned decisions clearly demonstrate that this Court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse of Section 498-A IPC and the increased tendency of implicating relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes, without analysing the long-term ramifications of a trial on the complainant as well as the accused. It is further manifest from the said judgments 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. It is further manifest from the said judgments 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. Therefore, this Court by way of its judgments has warned the courts from proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against them.” 6.1) It is further held that, when the allegations against the in-laws are general and omnibus in nature, the Court may quash the crime against the said in-laws. 6.2) In case of Mohammed Qamruddin & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. in Criminal Appeal No. 2309 of 2024, dated 29 th April, 2024, while following the decision of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. (supra) in paragraph 4, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under :- “ 4. It is already well settled by this Court in the case of ‘Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. vs. State of U.P. and Anr.’ reported in (2012) 10 SCC 741 and also in the case of ‘Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors.’ in Criminal Appeal No.195 of 2022 decided on 08.02.2022, that such vague, general and omnibus allegations against the family members/relatives implicating them in matrimonial disputes are an abuse of process of law. ” 7) After applying the principles enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of (i) Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. (supra) and (ii) Mohammed Qamruddin & Ors. (supra), we are of the considered view that, continuation of present crime against the Applicants will be sheer abuse of process of law and needs to be quashed. 8) In view of the above, Application is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (B).