SANKALP SATISH KALAMKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this application the applicants are seeking quashing of the First Information Report in connection with Crime No.241/2016, registered under Ss. 498A, read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and consequent proceeding arising out of the same bearing R.C.C. No.1077/2016, pending before the 6th Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Akola.

(2.) The applicant No.1 is husband, applicant No.2 is mother-in-law, applicant No.3 is sister-in-law and applicant No.4 is husband of sister-in-law. The crime is registered on the basis of a report lodged by the non-applicant No.2 on an allegation that her marriage was performed with the applicant No.1 on 28/12/2013. At the time of engagement applicant No.1-Sankalp demanded precious goods for the marriage and so also demanded the expenditure as per his status from the parents of non-applicant No.2. At that time non-applicant No.2 had not paid any heed towards him, as she was under impression that everything will go smoothly. After the marriage applicant No.1 and non-applicant No.2 resided at Akola for some days. Thereafter, applicant No.1 was serving at Pune and, therefore, she started residing with him at Pune. She alleged that the applicants were used to taunt the non-applicant No.2 regarding non-fulfilling the demands of precious goods as well as for the other reasons and she was harassed mentally as well as physically. It is further alleged that applicant No.1 used to give her threat regarding the dissolution of marriage, so also used to check messages on her mobile phone. It is further alleged that when non-applicant No.2 was posted at U.S.A. by her company for project, applicant No.1 never received the calls of non-applicant No.2 and when she returned back to India applicant No.1 used to asked for transfer of money in his name. She was also harassed for transferring the flat which was in her name and, therefore, she constrained to lodge the report. On the basis of the said report Police have registered the crime against the present applicants.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants, who placed on record the copies of petitions which was filed by the applicant No.1 for dissolution of marriage and non-applicant No.2 for restitution of conjugal rights.