(1.) This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, wherein, the petitioners have prayed that FIR being C.R.No.II272 of 2009, registered with Sector7 Police Station, Gandhinagar, and the chargesheet filed pursuant thereto, which is registered as Criminal Case No.2626 of 2010, pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gandhinagar, be quashed and set aside.
(2.) Heard learned advocate Mr.Hardik Bharhmbhat for the petitioner, learned advocate Mr.Hardik B. shah for respondent No.2 and learned APP Ms.Reeta Chandarana for the respondent No.1State of Gujarat.
(3.) Learned advocate Mr.Bharhmbhat appearing for the petitioner mainly contended that the FIR which is registered under Section 498A, 497, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners is nothing but a gross abuse of the process of the Court and therefore, the same be quashed and set aside. He further submitted that the respondent No.2 has married with the original accused No.1Prahladpuri Shivpuri Goswami before 27 years from the date of filing of the FIR. The petitioner No.1 i.e. the husband has not pressed the petition at the time of issuance of the notice and therefore, this Court may consider the case of the petitioners No.2 to 5. It is submitted that petitioner No.2 is the brotherinlaw, petitioner No.3 is the motherinlaw, petitioner No.4 is the sisterinlaw and petitioner No.5 is the sister of the friend of the accused No.1. They are not connected with the alleged offense in any manner. In the impugned FIR, general allegations are levelled against the petitioners No.2 to 4 that at the instigation of the petitioners No.2 to 4, the husband of the complainant was giving physical and mental torture to her. It is alleged in the FIR that the accused No.1husband was having illicit relationship with the petitioner No.5 and therefore the accused No.1 husband was giving physical and mental torture to the complainant. However, no allegations are levelled against the petitioners No.2 to 4 and therefore, the impugned FIR and the chargesheet filed pursuant thereto be quashed and set aside qua the petitioners. In support of his contention, learned advocate for the petitioners has placed reliance upon the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Preeti Gupta and Anr. v. State of Jharkhand and Anr., reported in 2010 (3) G.L.H. 258. At this stage, learned advocate for the petitioners submitted that so far as petitioner No.5 is concerned, even assuming without admitting that petitioner No.5 was having any relation with the accused No.1husband, she cannot be considered as relative of the husband of the complainant and therefore provision of Section 498A of Indian Penal Code are not attracted qua the petitioner No.5. Learned advocate has placed reliance upon the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of U. Suvetha v. State by Inspector of Police and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 757, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that girlfriend or concubine of the husband is not a relative of the husband and therefore complaint under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code cannot be filed against such person. Learned advocate therefore submitted that though there is no material against the petitioners, Investigating Officer has wrongly submitted the chargesheet and therefore chargesheet filed against the petitioners be quashed and set aside.