RAHUL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant application, husband and in-laws of the complainant - respondent No.2, who set the law in motion by registering Crime No.0082 of 2021, are seeking quashment of the said crime and consequential criminal proceeding arising out of it.

(2.) Allegations emerging from First Information Report (FIR) are that respondent No.2 - complainant was married to applicant No.1 on 26/6/2019. According to her, after marriage, she went to reside with applicant No.1 husband where all the accused applicants resided jointly. Initially, for 15 days after marriage, she was treated properly, however, she has alleged that thereafter, all the applicants commented that she did not bring sufficient dowry. That her husband commented on her looks and further said that he married her at the instance of his father, otherwise he would not have married her and he used to beat her and further addressed her parents as beggars. He further said that dowry was not given befitting his job and she has alleged ill treatment at his hands. According to her, brother in law Amol used to instigate applicant No.1 husband saying that she did not serve food to him on time. Her both sisters in law namely Suvarna and Krupali taunted her that she is unable to cook and that her parents did not teach her discipline and they too instigated her husband and her mother in law. As regards to applicant No.6 i.e. husband of sister in law of the complainant, she has alleged that he too complained that he was not served with food and he thereby instigated husband to further abuse her. That she was made to sleep in a common room with all rather than giving her a separate room. She has alleged that applicant No.8 also said that neither he nor his maternal uncle likes her. Lastly she has alleged that husband threatened to upload her video on YouTube and demanded a two wheeler and cash of Rs.3,00,000.00 for setting up a Laboratory for his younger brother. With such allegations, she lodged complaint with aforesaid Police Station and crime was registered.

(3.) Inviting our attention to above FIR, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that apparently allegations are false, baseless, vague, omnibus and general in nature. He emphasized that complaint has been filed merely out of annoyance and to take revenge. It is pointed out that apart from involving husband, all near and dear ones, who have no concerned with the marital discord are tried to be involved with sole intention of harass them. He pointed out that none of the ingredients to attract offence under Sec. 498-A of the IPC are finding place in the complaint and therefore, according to him entertainment of such complaint and prosecution based on the same would amount to abuse of law. He emphatically submitted that in fact husband has taken steps for restitution of conjugal rights but still complainant did not respond and rather involved entire family of husband in the complaint with ulterior motive. He pointed out that some of the applicants are resident of distinct places and had no concerned with them, however, they too are named in the complaint. Thus according to him, allegations being vague, bald and devoid of any details, the complaint and the proceeding arising out of the same deserve to be quashed by allowing the prayers.