DAMODAR RAMBHAU GULHANE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) This petition is filed challenging the First Information Report (for short "FIR") bearing crime No. 343 of 2015 dated 17-12-2015 registered with MIDC Police Station, Jalgaon Taluka and District Jalgaon for the offence punishable under section 498, 417, 406, 323, 514, 516 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners invites our attention to the allegations made in the criminal complaint No. 3464 of 2015 filed by respondent No. 2 against petitioner No. 3-Babybai, mother in law of respondent No. 2 and petitioner No. 1 - Damodhar husband of respondent No. 2, however, respondent No. 2 did not add other petitioners in said complaint as accused. There are no allegations against other petitioners than petitioner No. 3-Bebitai and petitioner No. 1 - Damodhar. It is submitted that as alleged by respondent No. 2 that she left matrimonial house on 08-02-2015. Thereafter, she had first opportunity to file the complaint on 16-09-2015. In the said complaint, except petitioner No. 3- Babybai and petitioner No. 1 Damodhar, no other petitioners have been added as accused in the complaint making specific allegations muchless even general allegations against other accused. Therefore, it is submitted that after lapse of more than two months period from filing the said complaint respondent No. 2 again lodged FIR in the MIDC Police Station, Jalgaon, wherein names of other petitioners have been added as accused and general allegations are made against them. It is submitted that since other petitioners than petitioner No. 3 Babybai and petitioner No. 1 - Damodhar were not added as accused in the earlier complaint filed by respondent No. 2, and after thought the FIR is lodged after lapse of two months thereafter, therefore the FIR deserves to be quashed. It is submitted that petitioners No. 2 and 3 are old aged persons and even they are not able to move from one place to another place and allegations in the FIR against them are unsustainable, therefore, on aforesaid grounds also FIR deserves to be quashed and set aside.