MyNation KnowledgeBase

Landmark Judgments and Articles on Law

Register to Download

Wife files 7 FIR/DV Complaints yet 498A Quash against Family Members

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 8027 of 2015

NILESHBHAI MANUBHAI GADHVI & 4….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1….Respondent(s)

Appearance: MR VAIBHAV A VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 – 5
HCLS COMMITTEE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS.AKSHITABA SOLANKI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 09/12/2016

ORAL ORDER 1

1 At the outset, this application is not pressed so far as the applicant No.1, namely, Nileshbhai Manubhai Gadhvi i.e. the husband is concerned.

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 First Information Report dated 6th January 2015 lodged with the Naroda Police Station as C.R. No.I¬10 of 2015 for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 323 read with 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

3 The applicant No.2 is the father¬in¬law, the applicant No.3 is the mother-in¬law, the applicant No.4 is the sister¬in¬law and the applicant No.5 is also the sister¬in-law of the first informant.

4 So far as the applicant No.5 is concerned, she is a married lady residing at her matrimonial home. 5 It appears from the materials on record that the first informant got married with the applicant No.1 on 3rd September 2006. In the wedlock, two issues have been born. It appears from day one the first informant could not adjust herself at her matrimonial home. The history of the litigation so far as initiated at her instance speaks for itself:

(i). F.I.R. dated 3rd April 2007
(ii). Complaint under the Domestic Violence Act on 14th October 2010.
(iii). F.I.R. dated 17th April 2011
(iv). Complaint under the Domestic Violence Act on 7th May 2011
(v). F.I.R. dated 18th July 2011
(vi). F.I.R. in the month of January 2011
(vii). Impugned F.I.R. Dated 6th January 2015.

6 I am told that she has settled the dispute so far as the first four proceedings are concerned. The other three proceedings including the present F.I.R. are pending.

7 The first informant is a working lady. She is serving with the P.G.V.C.L. Prima facie, it appears that some difference of opinion arose between the husband and the wife since the wife insisted that after marriage, she would continue to work with the P.G.V.C.L., whereas the husband had something else in his mind.

8 In my view, there was no good reason with the wife to drag the other applicants in the F.I.R. The allegations are quite general and vague in nature. I am of the view that even if the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. are accepted, no case of cruelty within the meaning of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code could be said to have been made out so far as the family members of the husband are concerned.

9 Since the first informant is residing as on date separately from the applicant No.1 – husband, she must now settle the matter with him and see to it that the prosecution does not continue. No husband would like to stay with a wife who has lodged an F.I.R. against him. The F.I.R. against the husband will never permit the wife to come close to the husband. I am sure the first informant, who is an educated lady, will be able to understand this. If ultimately the dispute is amicably settled, then it will be open for the applicant No.1 – husband to file a fresh application seeking quashing of the First Information Report.

10 With the above, this application is partly allowed. The First Information Report being C.R. No.I¬10 of 2015 registered with the Naroda Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 323 read with 114 of the Indian Penal Code is hereby ordered to be quashed so far as the applicants Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 are concerned. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.

11 Since this petition has not been pressed so far as the applicant No.1 is concerned, I will have to vacate the ad¬interim order which was granted earlier in favour of all the applicants. The resultant effect will be that the police will start with the investigation. In such circumstances, it will be in the fitness of thing if the wife resolves the matter so that the husband can immediately file a fresh application for quashing. Having regard to the nature of the dispute, even if the investigation continues, there shall be no arrest of the applicant No.1.

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Important SC/HC Judgements on 498A IPC
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2018 MyNation KnowledgeBase
eXTReMe Tracker
×

Free Legal Help just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registrationJOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh