—
Gujarat High Court
Bharti @ Tiku Kanaiyalal Rajput vs State Of Gujarat on 4 April, 2024
Author: Ilesh J. Vora
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19091/2022 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 19091 of 2022
BHARTI @ TIKU KANAIYALAL RAJPUT ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT ANR.
Appearance:
MR DHAVAL TRIVEDI, ADVOCATE FOR MR PRATIK B BAROT(3711) for
the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
MR JAY MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 04/04/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. This quashing petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., has
been preferred by three sisters-in-law of the second
respondent against whom the FIR being C.R.
No.11217014210676 of 2021, filed and registered with
Kakoshi Police Station, Dist: Patan for the offence
punishable under Sections 498A, 294(b) and 506(2) of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition
Act.
2. Brief facts giving rise to file present application are that,
the marriage of second respondent Kailashben Chauhan was
solemnized on 16.03.2006 with Arjunsinh Rajput, resident of
Mahesana. The applicants are sisters-in-law of the second
respondent. The second respondent-wife has lodged an FIR
against six persons of the family including the applicants
Page 1 of 8
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 08 20:39:19 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19091/2022 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2024
undefined
herein, inter alia, alleging that, she has been subjected to
cruelty by the husband and his relatives as they are not happy
and satisfied with the dowry given by her parents at the time
of marriage. It is further alleged that, after the marriage, due
to matrimonial dispute, she had lodged a complaint against the
husband and his relatives with Mahesana Police Station and
same was withdrawn because of the compromise and again
when she went to matrimonial home, she had been harassed
mentally and physically on the issue of insufficient dowry and
was forced to bring Rs.10 lacs so as to enable them to
purchase the house. So far allegations made against the
applicants are concerned, despite so many requests made to
them to resolve the dispute, they could not resolve it and on
the contrary, they aided and abated the accused-in laws in
commission of the offence of cruelty and dowry.
3. Mr. Dhaval Trivedi, learned counsel for Mr. Pratik Barot,
learned counsel appearing for the applicants has submitted
that, the applicants have been falsely impleaded as accused
and the allegations of abatement on their part absolutely false
and frivolous. The applicants are living separately at their
matrimonial home and they have nothing to do with the
matrimonial dispute as referred in the FIR and therefore, by
alleging vague and general allegations, in a casual manner,
the criminal machinery being put in motion with ulterior motive
and same is nothing but a gross misuse of process and this is a
fit case to exercise powers of this Court.
4. The second respondent, though served, has chosen not
to contest the application and remained absent throughout the
Page 2 of 8
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 08 20:39:19 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19091/2022 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2024
undefined
proceedings.
5. The State counsel Mr. Jay Mehta, has opposed the
application and contended that, in view of the disputed facts
as raised herein, no case is made out to quash the criminal
proceedings, more particularly when chargesheet is filed
before the Court.
6. In such circumstances, relying on the parameters for
quashing laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Bhajanlal
(1992 SC Suple.1 335), it is submitted that the allegations
made in the FIR, even if they are taken at their face value and
accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any
offence against the applicant and therefore, this is a fit case to
exercise the powers of this Court.
7. The scope and power of the High Court to quash the first
information report is well settled. The power under Section 482
of the Code has to be exercised sparingly and cautiously to
prevent the abuse of process of Court and to secure the ends
of justice. The High Court should refrain from giving a prima-
facie decision, unless there are compelling circumstances to do
so. Taking the allegations, as they are, without adding or
subtracting anything, if no offence is made out, only then, the
High Court would be justified in quashing the proceedings in
the exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
8. The Apex Court in case of State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal
reported in (1992) Supp 1 SCC 335 has laid down the
guidelines that must be adhered to while exercising inherent
Page 3 of 8
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 08 20:39:19 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19091/2022 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2024
undefined
powers under Sections 482 of the Code to quash the criminal
proceedings. The relevant paragraph reads thus:
“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant
provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of
law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the
exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the
inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have
extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories
of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be
exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or
otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be
possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently
channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give
an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power
should be exercised:
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or
the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and
accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any
offence or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other
materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a
cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers
under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a
Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or
complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do
not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case
against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a
cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence,
no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an orderPage 4 of 8
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 08 20:39:19 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/19091/2022 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2024
undefined
of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the
Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so
absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no
prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is
sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the
provisions of the Code or the Act concerned (under which a
criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and
continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific
provision in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious
redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala
fides and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an
ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a
view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”
9. Since the FIR in question emanates from matrimonial
disputes. Recently, the Apex Court in case of Kahkashan
Kausar @ Sonam Ors. Vs. State of Bihar Ors. reported in
(2022) 6 SCC 599 held and observed that, in recent times,
matrimonial litigation in the country has increased significantly
which led in an increased tendency to employ provision such
as 498A Indian Penal Code as instruments to settled personal
scores against the husband and his relatives. In para-17 of the
judgment, it is observed that:
“17. ….. this court has at numerous instances expressed
concern over the misuse of section 498A IPC and the
increased tendency of implicating relatives of the
husband in matrimonial disputes, without analyzing the
long term ramifications of a trial on the complainant asPage 5 of 8
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 08 20:39:19 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.MA/19091/2022 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2024
undefined
well as the accused. It is further manifest from the said
judgments that false implication by way of general
omnibus allegations made in the course of matrimonial
dispute, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the
process of law. Therefore, this court by way of its
judgments has warned the courts from proceeding
against the relatives and in-laws of the husband when
no prima facie case is made out against them.”.
10. In matrimonial case, the Apex Court in the case of Preeti
Gupta and another vs. State of Jharkhand and another reported
in (2010) 7 SCC 667 observed that, a serious relook of the
entire provision is warranted by the legislation. It is also a
matter of common knowledge that, exaggerated version of the
incident are reflected in a large number of complaints. The
tendency of over implication is also reflected in very large
number of cases.
11. In the case of Geeta Mehrotra and Anr. v. State of Uttar
Pradesh and Anr reported in (2012) 10 SCC 741, it is observed
that, family members of the husband are being implicated
without allegations of active involvement and they are being
implicated casually.
12. Having heard learned counsels for the respective parties,
the issue falls for consideration is whether the case is made
out for quashing the criminal proceedings by invoking the
extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court.
13. For the aforementioned reasons, the case is fully covered
by the categories (i) and (vii) as enumerated by the Apex Court
Page 6 of 8
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 08 20:39:19 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19091/2022 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2024
undefined
in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal and therefore,
this Court is convinced that the continuation of the criminal
proceedings would be an abuse of process of the Court and
law.
14. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of present
case and on perusal of allegations made in the FIR and
material in the form of chargesheet, it reveals that, the
applicants are sisters-in-law of the second respondent and
living separately at their respective matrimonial homes. The
marriage span is of 21 years. In 2008, the complaint was
lodged and matter was compromised. In these background
facts, this Court is of considered view that the applicants who
have never shared the house with the second respondent,
have been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. The
allegations in relation to the conversation made on call with
the father of the second respondent seems to be inherently
improbable, false and vague. Thus, therefore, without much
discussion on merits of allegations and considering the role
attributed to the present applicants herein, this Court is of
prima-facie view that, the allegations made against the
applicants, accepted to be true, do not disclose or make out
any offence. Therefore, the present application deserves
consideration.
15. Resultantly, the application succeeds. The FIR being
C.R. No.11217014210676 of 2021, filed and registered
with Kakoshi Police Station, Dist: Patan and other
consequential proceedings arising thereto are quashed and set
aside qua the applicants herein. Accordingly, Rule is made
Page 7 of 8
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 08 20:39:19 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19091/2022 ORDER DATED: 04/04/2024
undefined
absolute. Direct service is permitted.
16. The views expressed hereinabove are confined to the
case of present applicants herein. The trial Court shall decide
the case of the husband in accordance with law without being
influenced by the observations made hereinabove.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
TAUSIF SAIYED
Page 8 of 8
Downloaded on : Mon Apr 08 20:39:19 IST 2024
