SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Padmavati Nijappa Kamble And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 15 February, 2024

Take notes as you read a judgment using our Virtual Legal Assistant and get email alerts whenever a new judgment matches your query (Query Alert Service). Try out our Premium Member services — Free for one month.

Bombay High Court

Padmavati Nijappa Kamble And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 15 February, 2024

Author: N.R. Borkar

Bench: Prakash D. Naik, N.R. Borkar

2024:BHC-AS:8034-DB
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 21/02/2024
12-APL-532-2023.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 532 OF 2023
Padmavati Nijappa Kamble and others … Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and another … Respondents
………
Mr. Arun Shejwal for the Applicants.
Mr. Anand Salgaonkar, APP for the State.
Ms. Archismati Chandramore for Respondent No.2.
………
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK
N.R. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED : 15th FEBRUARY 2024

P.C. :-

. Learned Counsel for the Applicants, at the outset, on
instructions submitted that he would not press relief sought in this
Application on behalf of Applicant No.1.

2. The Applicants are charge-sheeted for the offences under
Sections 498A, 406, 323, 504 r/w. 34 of
Indian Penal Code (IPC). The
First Information Report (F.I.R.) was registered on 10 th June 2017 with
Nigadi Police Station vide C.R. No.324 of 2017.

3. The Applicant No.1 is the mother-in-law and Applicant No.2
is sister-in-law of the complainant. Applicant Nos.3 to 12 are the
relatives of the Applicant No.1.

4. The complainant has alleged that marriage between the
accused No.1 and the complainant was solemnized on 16 th December
2004. Pursuant to the marriage, she joined the matrimonial home. The
Kanchan P Dhuri 1 / 7

::: Uploaded on – 20/02/2024 28/02/2024 07:52:51 :::
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 21/02/2024
12-APL-532-2023.odt

parents of the complainant had provided the ornaments to her during
the marriage. The accused started demanding articles from the
complainant. She was ill-treated. The ornaments were entrusted to the
accused. The demand of money by husband for purchasing the car.
There is misappropriation of ornaments. The relatives of the
complainant’s husband caused harassment and gave ill-treatment to her.
On completing the investigation, charge-sheet is filed.

5. Learned Counsel for the Applicants submitted that the
Applicant Nos.2 to 12 are falsely implicated in the F.I.R. The allegations
against them are vague and omnibus. There is no material to
substantiate the charges against them. The distant relatives are dragged
into the prosecution by the complainant. Although the marriage was
performed in 2004, the F.I.R. was registered in the year 2017.

6. Learned Counsel for the Applicants has relied upon the
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kahkashan Kausar
@ Sonam others vs. State of Bihar and others , reported in (2022) 6
SCC 599.

7. Learned APP submitted that specific role has been attributed
to the Applicants. There are specific allegations against the husband and
mother-in-law. The sister-in-law has participated in causing harassment
to the complainant. During the course of investigation, statements of the
witness were recorded which supports the version of complainant.

8. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2 submits that there
are allegations against the Applicants in the F.I.R. Specific overt act is
attributed to the Applicants. There was demand of articles by the
accused. Charge-sheet contains the evidence against the accused.

Kanchan P Dhuri 2 / 7

::: Uploaded on – 20/02/2024 28/02/2024 07:52:51 :::
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 21/02/2024
12-APL-532-2023.odt

9. It is pertinent to note that marriage between the
complainant and the accused No.1 was performed on 16 th December
2004. According to the complainant, she continued to stay at the
matrimonial home with the accused. The Applicant Nos.2 and 3 are
sisters-in-law of the complainant. Applicant No.1 is the mother-in-law of
the complainant and Applicant Nos.4 to 12 are relatives of the Applicant
No.1.

10. We have perused the F.I.R. and the statements which form
part of the charge-sheet. We find that the allegations against the
Applicant Nos.2 to 12 are omnibus and vague. Applicant Nos.4 to 12 are
the relatives. They are being unnecessarily dragged in the proceedings.
The allegations attributed to Applicant Nos.2 to 12 are not sufficient to
prosecute them for the alleged offences. No specific overt act is
attributed to Applicant Nos.2 to 12. The allegations are of general
nature. The husband is not party to this Application.

11. The Apex Court in several decisions has observed that the
Court should be careful in proceeding against the distant relatives in
crimes pertaining to matrimonial dispute. The relatives of the husband
should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific
instances of their involvement in the crime are made out.

12. The Apex Court in the case of Kahakashan Kausar v. State of
Bihar Sonam and others vs. State of Bihar and others (supra), has
observed that incorporation of
Section 498A of IPC was aimed at
preventing cruelty committed upon a woman by her husband and her in-
laws, by facilitating rapid state intervention. There is an increased
tendency to employ provisions such as 498A
IPC as instruments to settle
personal scores against the husband and his relatives.
Kanchan P Dhuri 3 / 7

::: Uploaded on – 20/02/2024 28/02/2024 07:52:51 :::
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 21/02/2024
12-APL-532-2023.odt

13. In the case of Rajesh Sharma and Ors. v. State of U.P. Anr.
(2018) 10 SCC 472, the Supreme Court has observed as follows :

“14. Section 498-A was inserted in the statute
with the laudable object of punishing cruelty at
the hands of husband or his relatives against a
wife particularly when such cruelty had potential
to result in suicide or murder of a woman as
mentioned in the Statement of Objects and
Reasons of Act 46 of 1983. The expression
“cruelty” in
Section 498-A covers conduct which
may drive the woman to commit suicide or cause
grave injury (mental or physical) or danger to life
or harassment with a view to coerce her to meet
unlawful demand. It is a matter of serious
concern that large number of cases continue to be
filed under
Section 498-A alleging harassment of
married women. We have already referred to some
of the statistics from the Crime Records Bureau.
This Court had earlier noticed the fact that most
of such complaints are filed in the heat of the
moment over trivial issues. Many of such
complaints are not bona fide. At the time of filing
of the complaint, implications and consequences
are not visualised. At times such complaints lead
to uncalled for harassment not only to the accused
but also to the complainant. Uncalled for arrest
may ruin the chances of settlement.”
14. In Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Anr. (2014)8 SCC 273 , it
was also observed that :
“4. There is a phenomenal increase in
matrimonial disputes in recent years. The
institution of marriage is greatly revered in this
country.
Section 498-A IPC was introduced with
avowed object to combat the menace of
harassment to a woman at the hands of her
husband and his relatives. The fact that Section

Kanchan P Dhuri 4 / 7

::: Uploaded on – 20/02/2024 28/02/2024 07:52:51 :::
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 21/02/2024
12-APL-532-2023.odt

498-A IPC is a cognizable and non-bailable
offence has lent it a dubious place of pride
amongst the provisions that are used as weapons
rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The
simplest way to harass is to get the husband and
his relatives arrested under this provision. In
quite a number of cases, bedridden grandfathers
and grandmothers of the husbands, their sisters
living abroad for decades are arrested.”

15. In Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand Anr., (2010) 7 SCC 667 , it
has also been observed that :
“32. It is a matter of common experience that
most of these complaints under
Section 498-A IPC
are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial
issues without proper deliberations. We come
across a large number of such complaints which
are not even bona fide and are filed with oblique
motive. At the same time, rapid increase in the
number of genuine cases of dowry harassment is
also a matter of serious concern.

33. The learned members of the Bar have
enormous social responsibility and obligation to
ensure that the social fibre of family life is not
ruined or demolished. They must ensure that
exaggerated versions of small incidents should
not be reflected in the criminal complaints.
Majority of the complaints are filed either on their
advice or with their concurrence. The learned
members of the Bar who belong to a noble
profession must maintain its noble traditions and
should treat every complaint under
Section 498-A
as a basic human problem and must make serious
endeavour to help the parties in arriving at an
amicable resolution of that human problem. They
must discharge their duties to the best of their
abilities to ensure that social fibre, peace and

Kanchan P Dhuri 5 / 7

::: Uploaded on – 20/02/2024 28/02/2024 07:52:51 :::
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 21/02/2024
12-APL-532-2023.odt

tranquility of the society remains intact. The
members of the Bar should also ensure that one
complaint should not lead to multiple cases.

34. Unfortunately, at the time of filing of the
complaint the implications and consequences are
not properly visualised by the complainant that
such complaint can lead to insurmountable
harassment, agony and pain to the complainant,
accused and his close relations.

35. The ultimate object of justice is to find out
the truth and punish the guilty and protect the
innocent. To find out the truth is a Herculean task
in majority of these complaints. The tendency of
implicating the husband and all his immediate
relations is also not uncommon. At times, even
after the conclusion of the criminal trial, it is
difficult to ascertain the real truth. The courts
have to be extremely careful and cautious in
dealing with these complaints and must take
pragmatic realities into consideration while
dealing with matrimonial cases. The allegations
of harassment of husband’s close relations who
had been living in different cities and never
visited or rarely visited the place where the
complainant resided would have an entirely
different complexion. The allegations of the
complaint are required to be scrutinised with
great care and circumspection.

36. Experience reveals that long and
protracted criminal trials lead to rancour,
acrimony and bitterness in the relationship
amongst the parties. It is also a matter of common
knowledge that in cases filed by the complainant
if the husband or the husband’s relations had to
remain in jail even for a few days, it would ruin

Kanchan P Dhuri 6 / 7

::: Uploaded on – 20/02/2024 28/02/2024 07:52:51 :::
This Order is modified/corrected by Speaking to Minutes Order dated 21/02/2024
12-APL-532-2023.odt

the chances of an amicable settlement altogether.
The process of suffering is extremely long and
painful.”

16. In K. Subba Rao v. State of Telangana , (2018) 14 SCC 452, it was
observed that :
“6. .. The courts should be careful in proceeding
against the distant relatives in crimes pertaining
to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. The
relatives of the husband should not be roped in
on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific
instances of their involvement in the crime are
made out.”

17. Considering the lack of evidence against Applicant Nos.2 to
4, we are inclined to quash the proceedings against them.

ORDER

(i) The prayer for quashing against Applicant No.1 is not
pressed.

(ii) The F.I.R. dated 10th June 2017 registered with Nigadi Police
Station vide C.R. No.324 of 2017 is quashed against Applicant Nos.2 to

12.

(ii) Criminal Application stands disposed of.

( N.R. BORKAR, J. ) ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. )

Kanchan P Dhuri 7 / 7

::: Uploaded on – 20/02/2024 28/02/2024 07:52:51 :::

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
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

Recent Comments

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2024 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