SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Alim Sk. S/O Mohammad Hanif Sk vs The State Of Maharashtra on 22 June, 2018

1 Application 3101 of 2015


Criminal Application No.3101 of 2015

1) Alim Sk. s/o. Mohammad Hanif Sk,
Age 32 years,
Occupation : Driver,
R/o Abrar Colony, Satara,

2) Mohmad Hanif s/o Tareq Shaikh,
Age 70 years, Occupation: Nil,
R/o. Pratappurwadi,
Taluka Gangapur,
District Aurangabad.

3) Khafunbee Shaikh w/o Mohammad
Age 60 years, Occupation: Nil,
R/o Pratappurwadi,
Taluka Gangapur,
District Aurangabad.

4) Nazir Md. Hanif Shaikh,
Age 40 years,
Occupation: Agriculture,
R/o Gavali Dhanora,
Taluka Gangapur,
District Aurangabad.

5) Wazir Mohammad s/o. Hanif Shaikh,
Age 35 years,
Occupation: Agriculture.
R/o. Pratappurwadi,
Taluka Gangapur,
District Aurangabad.

6) Shaikh Malika w/o Yunus Shaikh,
Age 45 years,Occupation: Household,
R/o Mhaski, Taluka Vaijapur,
District Aurangabad,
At preset Silk Mill Colony, Aurangabad.

::: Uploaded on – 27/06/2018 28/06/2018 00:57:14 :::
2 Application 3101 of 2015

7) Nisar s/o. Isak Patel,
Age 29 years,
Occupation: Agriculture,
R/o Loni, Taluka Khultabad,
District Aurangabad. .. Applicants.


1) The State of Maharashtra,
Through Investigation Officer,
Satara Police Station,
Taluka District Aurangabad.

2) Jamila w/o. Alim Shaikh,
Age 27 years,
Occupation: Household,
R/o. Jamli, Taluka Paithan,
District Aurangabad. .. Respondents.


Shri. Ravindra V. Gore, Advocate, for applicants.

Shri. S.J. Salgare, Additional Public Prosecutor, for
respondent No.1.

Shri. S.T. Yaseen, Advocate, for respondent No.2.



Date: 22 JUNE 2018

JUDGMENT (Per T.V. Nalawade, J.):

1) Rule, rule made returnable forthwith. By heard

both sides by consent or final disposal.

::: Uploaded on – 27/06/2018 28/06/2018 00:57:15 :::

3 Application 3101 of 2015

2) The application is filed under section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure for relief of quashing of Crime

No.79/2015 registered with Satara Police Station,

Aurangabad for offence punishable under section 498A

read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The crime is

registered on the basis of report given by wife of applicant

No.1. Applicant No.1 has not pressed the proceeding and

so his application is disposed of as withdrawn.

3) In the F.I.R. allegations are made by the first

informant that after 5 years of the marriage ill-treatment

was given to her by applicant Nos.1 to 7. Applicant No.2

is father of applicant No.1. Applicant No.3 is mother of the

husband, applicant Nos.4 to 5 are the brothers of the

husband. Applicant No.6 is sister of the husband and

applicant No.7 is son of sister of the husband.

4) Allegations are made that the applicants were

asking to leave the house as she was not bringing amount

for construction of the house. She has contended that as

her husband, applicant No.1 is working as a driver he

shifted to Aksa Colony and she cohabited with husband at

::: Uploaded on – 27/06/2018 28/06/2018 00:57:15 :::
4 Application 3101 of 2015

Aksa Colony. She has made further allegations that the

other applicants used to come to Aksa Colony and after

coming there they used to give ill-treatment. The other

allegations are made that from 2009 there was ill-

treatment to her. So after 5 years of the marriage husband

had shifted to Aksa colony and she was cohabiting with

her husband at different place. Vague allegations are

made that all other applicants, who are relatives of the

husband, were coming to Aksa Colony for giving ill-

treatment to her.

5) In the contentions of the first informant it is not

disputed that other applicants were not living with

husband. Further, record is produced by these applicants,

which is in the form of Identify Cards issued by Election

Commission and that record shows that they are living

separate from applicant No.1. No specific incident is

quoted by the wife about any incident in which the

applicant nos.2 to 7 had given ill-treatment to her.

6) Learned counsels for both the sides placed

reliance on the some observations made in the following

reported cases in support of their rival contentions.

::: Uploaded on – 27/06/2018 28/06/2018 00:57:15 :::

5 Application 3101 of 2015

(i) (2009) 10 SCC 184 (Neelu Chopra v. Bharti)

(ii) AIR 2001 SC 3253 (S.M. Datta v. State of Gujarat)

(iii) AIR 1999 SC 1216 (Rajesh v. State NCT of Delhi)

(iv) (2014) 3 SCC 383 (Bhaskar Lal Sharma v. Monica).

7) In the case of Neelu (supra) the Apex Court has

made observations that when crime is registered out of

matrimonial dispute, specific allegation needs to be made

against the relatives of the husband showing their exact

role in the ill-treatment. If that is not done the Court can

quash the proceeding as there is possibility of implication

of all the relatives of the husband to pressurize that side.

In the present matter also such possibility is there and as

there are no specific allegations as against applicant

Nos.2 to 7, this Court holds that relief needs to be granted

to applicant Nos.2 to 7. In the result, the application is

allowed. Relief is granted to applicant Nos.2 to 7 in terms

of prayer clause (B). The proceeding can go on as against

the husband. Rule made absolute in those terms.

Sd/- Sd/-


::: Uploaded on – 27/06/2018 28/06/2018 00:57:15 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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