SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

4 Whether This Case Involves A … vs State Of Gujarat & on 10 March, 2017

                 R/CR.MA/22949/2015                                                JUDGMENT



                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
               CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING  SET ASIDE
                             FIR/ORDER) NO. 22949 of 2015
                                        With
                      CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 13234 of 2015


         FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


         HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA

         ==========================================================

1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to
see the judgment ? NO

2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

NO
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
judgment ? NO

4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law
as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or
NO
any order made thereunder ?

==========================================================
SUNILBHAI RAMSHANKER RATHOD 2….Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT 1….Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:

NANAVATI CO., ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 – 3
MAYANK K TRIVEDI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR KK TRIVEDI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MRS. PRITI J JOSHI, 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 : 10/03/2017

ORAL COMMON JUDGMENT

Page 1 of 3

HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Sat Mar 11 00:27:03 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/22949/2015 JUDGMENT

1 Since the issues raised in both the captioned applications are the 
same   and   the   challenge   is   also   to   the   selfsame   proceedings   of   the 
criminal case, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of 
by this common judgment and order. 

2 By   these   two   applications   under   Section   482   of   the   Code   of 
Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants – original accused persons seek 
to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying for quashing of the 
proceedings of the Criminal Case No.1538 of 2015 pending in the Court 
of the learned J.M.F.C. (Rural), Ahmedabad for the offence punishable 
under Sections 498A, 323, 294B, 506(2) read with 114 of the Indian 
Penal Code and Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 

3 It appears from the materials on record that the respondent No.2 
herein   got   married   to   the   applicant   No.1,   namely,   Sunil   Ramshanker 
Rathod on 7th  February 2015 at Madhya  Pradesh. After marriage, the 
respondent   No.2   started   residing   at   her   matrimonial   home   in 
Ahmedabad along with her father­in­law and mother­in­law, who are the 
applicants Nos.2 and 3. The applicant of the connected application is a 
married   sister­in­law   of   the   respondent   No.2.   It   appears   that   within 
eleven moths from the date of marriage, matrimonial problems cropped 
up. In such circumstances, the respondent No.2 thought fit to register 
the F.I.R. for the offence of cruelty. 

3 It   also   appears   from   the   materials   on   record   that   the   husband 
realised that the respondent No.2 was suffering from Epilepsy. She had 
many other problems. According to the applicants, she was unable to 
adjust herself at the matrimonial home. Much before the registration of 
the F.I.R. by the wife, the husband issued a Notice dated 5th  January 
2015, which is on record, and insisted that the marriage be dissolved. It 

Page 2 of 3

HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Sat Mar 11 00:27:03 IST 2017
R/CR.MA/22949/2015 JUDGMENT

is   the   case   of   the   applicants   that   parents   of   the   respondent   No.2 
concealed the ailment  of their daughter. 

4 As   usual,   no   sooner   something   goes   wrong   at   the   matrimonial 
home, the allegations are levelled as regards the demand of money and 
mental cruelty. 

5 Having gone through the materials on record and having heard 
the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I am of the view that the 
criminal   proceedings   initiated   by   the   respondent   No.2   against   the 
applicants   herein   is   nothing,   but   an   abuse   of   the   process   of   law. 
Stereotype allegations have been levelled, which I get rid of in almost 
each and every F.I.R. of the similar nature.  

6 In   such   circumstances   referred   to   above,   both   the   applications   are 
allowed. The further proceedings of the Criminal Case No.1538 of 2015 pending 
in the Court of the learned J.M.F.C. (Rural), Ahmedabad are hereby quashed. 
Rule is made absolute in both the applications. Direct service is permitted.

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.)
chandresh

Page 3 of 3

HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Sat Mar 11 00:27:03 IST 2017

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

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

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

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation