SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Kamal W/O. Padmanath Khochare And … vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 10 August, 2018

1 CrAppln 1693 18J

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1693 OF 2018

1. Kamal w/o Padmanath Khochare,
Age 54 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. Khadegolwali, Charms Corner,
B-302, Behind Pensil Factory,
At Post Khadegolwali, Vitthalwadi
(East), Tq. Kalyan, Dist. Thane.

2. Padmanath s/o Dagadu Khochare,
Age 60 years, Occ. Retired.
R/o. Khadegolwali, Charms Corner,
B-302, Behind Pensil Factory,
At post Khandegolwali, Vitthalwadi
(East), Tq. Kalyan, Dist. Thane.

3. Pramod s/o Padmanath Khochare,
Age 30 years, Occ. Service,
R/o. Quarter No. 1077, Ghatkopar,
C.T.S. Technical Cell, Material
Organization, Mumbai,
Ghatkopar (West).

4. Rameshwari w/o Prashant Khochare,
Age 40 years, Occu. Service.

5. Prashant s/o Padmanath Khochare,
Age 35 years, Occu. Service.
Applicant No. 4 5, R/o. Titwala,
Near Railway Station, Tq. Kalyan,
Dist. Thane. … Applicants
(Ori. accused)
VERSUS

1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Investing Officer,
Tofkhana Police Station,
Ahmednagar, Dist. Ahmednagar.

1/5

::: Uploaded on – 21/08/2018 21/08/2018 23:50:43 :::
2 CrAppln 1693 18J

2. Priyanka w/o Pravin Khochare,
Age 26 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. D-40, PramdaN, HUDCO,
Savedi Road, Ahmednagar,
Tq. Dist. Ahmednagar. … Respondents
(Respondent No. 2 is
original informant)

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. N.B. Narwade.
APP for respondent No. 1/State : Mr. S.J. Salgare.
Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. S.S. Jadhav.

CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE
K. L. WADANE, JJ.

DATE : 10th AUGUST, 2018.

JUDGMENT ( PER K.L. WADANE, J.) :

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the

parties, this application is taken up for final disposal.

2. This application is filed under the provisions of section 482 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure for relief of quashing of first information

report No. I-301/2018, dated 11.06.2018 registered with Tofkhana police

station, Ahmednagar, District Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under

section 498A, 323, 504, 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for applicants on instructions withdraw the application for

applicants No. 1 and 2.

2/5

::: Uploaded on – 21/08/2018 21/08/2018 23:50:43 :::

3 CrAppln 1693 18J

3. Applicants No. 1 and 2 are mother-in-law and father-in-law of

the respondent No. 2/original complainant. Applicant No. 3 and 5 are the

brother-in-laws of the respondent No. 2/complainant and applicant No. 4 is

the wife of applicant No. 5.

4. Complainant Priyanka Pravin Khochare lodged complaint

against the applicants alleging that she performed marriage with Pravin

Khochare on 27.02.2016. In the marriage her father spent Rs. 20 to 25 lakh

and gave 30-32 tolas gold. The complainant went for cohabitation and just

from third day of the cohabitation, the family members were started

illtreating her mentally by saying that her father did not give a bullet in the

marriage. On 04.03.2016 the husband of complainant Pravin told her that

since last 2 to 3 years he has love affair with one Jayshree Gaikwad and if

she is ready to accept the relationship, he will cohabit with the complainant.

The complainant ignored the fact and cohabited with her husband. On

28.03.2016 applicants No. 1 to 3 and husband of complainant abused and

assaulted the complainant on account of demand of Rs. 1,50,000/- for

purchasing bullet and drove her out. Due to which the father of complainant

gave Rs. 1,50,000/- to the husband of complainant but thereafter also they

illtreated the complainant.

5. It is further alleged by the complainant that by using her

husband’s phone Jayshree Gaikwad threatened the complainant. When

complainant told about the said fact to her father-in-law, mother-in-law,
3/5

::: Uploaded on – 21/08/2018 21/08/2018 23:50:43 :::
4 CrAppln 1693 18J
brother-in-law and sister-in-law they assaulted her and also threatened to kill.

On 30.10.2016 at the time of Laxmipujan the applicants No. 1 to 3 and her

husband demanded Rs. 5 lakh for purchasing flat. On that count they

assaulted her and left her to the house of her maternal uncle. With these

allegations, offence came to be registered against the applicants/accused for

the offences punishable under section 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with

section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

6. We have heard the arguments of Mr. Narwade, learned counsel

for the applicants, Mr. Salgare, learned APP for the respondent No.1/State

and Mr. Jadhav, learned counsel for respondent No. 2.

7. On perusal of the contents of the first information report it

appears that specific allegations of demand of money and harassment are

made against applicants/accused No. 1 and 2 and Pravin (husband). The

allegations made against the applicants No. 3 to 5 are vague and general in

nature. It appears that the applicant No. 3 is in service and residing at

Ghatkopar (West) Mumbai. The applicant No. 5 along with his wife

(applicant No. 4) is also residing at Titwala, Tq. Kalyan. Therefore prima-

facie it appears that applicants No. 3 to 5 have no direct concern with alleged

illtreatment, demand of money and threat to complainant.

8. On perusal of the first information report it also appears that

there is no material particular quoting any specific incident of visit or about

4/5

::: Uploaded on – 21/08/2018 21/08/2018 23:50:43 :::
5 CrAppln 1693 18J
illtreatment or harassment at the hands of applicants No. 3 to 5, so as to

attract the ingredients of section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code or other

offence as alleged by the complainant. Hence to prevent the abuse of process

of law, we find that discretion needs to be exercised in respect of applicants

No. 3 to 5. Hence, following order:

ORDER

1. Application of applicants No. 3 Pramod s/o Padmanath

Khochare, applicant No. 4 Rameshwari w/o Prashant Khochare

and applicant No. 5 Prashant s/o Padmanath Khochare, is

allowed. Relief is granted to them in terms of prayer clause ‘B’.

2. Application of other applicants No. 1 and 2 is disposed of as

withdrawn.

9. Criminal Application is disposed of accordingly.

10. Rule made absolute in the above terms.

(K. L. WADANE, J.) (T.V.NALAWADE, J.)

mkd

5/5

::: Uploaded on – 21/08/2018 21/08/2018 23:50:43 :::

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
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

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