IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 7338 of 2015
INDRAMOONI BHAGWANDIN PATEL & 5….Applicant(s)
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1….Respondent(s)
Appearance: MR ZALAK B PIPALIA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1-6
MS NISHA THAKORE, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
MR BALRAM D JAIN, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 20/12/2016
RULE returnable forthwith. Ms.Thakore, the learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.1 – State of Gujarat, and Mr.Balram Jain, the learned counsel waives service of notice for and on behalf of the repsondent no.2.
By this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying for quashing of the FIR being CR-I No.211 of 2014 registered with the Pandesara Police Station, Surat, for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 5 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
On 28th April 2015, the following order was passed :
“At the outset, Mr.Zalak Pipalia, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants, does not press this application so far as the applicant no.1 – husband is concerned. This application stands rejected as not pressed so far as the applicant no.1 is concerned.
Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 27th July 2015. Ms.Chandarana, the learned APP waives service of notice for and on behalf of the respondent no.1 State of Gujarat. The respondent no.2 be served directly through the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station. Direct service is permitted.”
It appears from the materials on record that the respondent no.2 herein got married to the applicant no.1 in the year 2008. In the wedlock, two children were born, a boy and a girl. It is alleged that soon after the marriage, the husband started treating the first informant cruelly. There was lot of harassment and torture at the end of the husband.
The applicant no.2 before me is the mother-in-law, the applicant no.3 is the father-in-law, the applicant no.4 is the sister-in-law, aged 19 years, the applicant no.5 is the uncle of the husband and the applicant no.6 is the aunt of the husband.
The allegations so far as the father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law are concerned, they are quite vague and general in nature. As usual, the first informant has tried to roped in all the family members of the husband.
I take notice of the fact that the second child, i.e. the son, was born on 22nd April 2011. At that point of time, the first informant was at her parental home. According to the averments made in the FIR, it is only on 19th June 2014 that she left with her children for the first time for her matrimonial home. As alleged, she was not permitted to stay at her matrimonial home and that is how the FIR came to be lodged.
So far as the applicant nos.5 and 6 are concerned, even according to Mr.Jain, the learned counsel appearing for the first informant, there is no case at all. There are no allegations as such against them.
In my view, the investigation at the end of the police so far as the applicant nos.2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are concerned, will be nothing but travesty of justice and abuse of the process of law. In view of the same, this application is allowed. The FIR being CR-I No.211 of 2014 registered with the Pandesara Police Station, Surat, is quashed so far as the applicant nos.2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 is concerned. The investigation shall proceed further in accordance with law so far as the husband is concerned. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.