Narayan Tukaram Kamble And Others v. Anjali Avinash Kamble
2025:BHC-AUG:37633
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2464 OF 2025 1.
Narayan s/o Tukaram Kamble (father-in-law) Age : 52 Years, Occu : Labour, R/o. Bhavishyadeepnagar, Salampura, Vadagaon Kolhati, Waluj, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
2.
Pramila w/o Narayan Kamble (mother-in-law) Age : 47 Years, Occu : Housewife, R/o. Bhavishyadeepnagar, Salampura, Vadagaon Kolhati, Waluj, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad.
3.
Ashay s/o Narayan Kamble (brother-in-law) Age : 23 Years, Occu : Student, R/o. Bhavishyadeepnagar, Salampura, Tq. Vadagaon Kolhati, Waluj, Tal. & Dist. Aurangabad.
4.
Archana w/o Tushar Jadhav, (sister-in-law) Age : 34 Years, Occu : Housewife, R/o. Bhimnagar, Bhausingpura, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad 5.
Tushar Jadhav (husband of sister-in-law) Age : 38 Years, occu : Labour, R/o. Bhimnagar, Bhausingpura, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad 6.
Ashwini w/o Vikram Sasane (sister-in-law) Age : 32 Years, Occu : Housewife, R/o. At Post Kachrewadi, Wadgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalna.
7.
Gopikabai w/o Tukaram Kamble (grandmother-in-law) (Deceased) 8.
Avinash s/o Narayan Kamble (husband) (Deceased) ...APPLICANTS
VERSUS
Anjali w/o Avinash Kamble Age : 24 Years, Occu : Housewife, R/o. Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded ...RESPONDENT *** None for the Applicants.
Mr. Parghane Madhukar M., Advocate for the Respondent. *** CORAM : ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.
DATE : DECEMBER 24, 2025 JUDGMENT :
1.
None appears for the Applicants.
2.
Heard learned counsel for the respondent and perused the record.
3.
The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to quash the proceedings bearing PWDVA No.10 of 2023 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nanded, against them. 4.
It also appears that, by order dated 17th December 2025, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that "the respondent would withdraw the application against applicant Nos. 3 to 6. Accordingly, his statement was recorded." However, the learned counsel failed to place on record the pursis of withdrawal filed before the learned Magistrate or any order passed by the learned Magistrate on such pursis before this Court. He further submitted that applicant No.7 - Gopikabai, the grandmother-in-law of the respondent, is no more.
5.
On perusal of the application, prima facie, no specific allegations appear against applicant Nos. 3 to 6 regarding the commission of domestic violence against the respondent. The allegations made against the applicants appears to be vague and omnibus. No specific instances of committing domestic violence by applicant Nos. 3 to 6 have been mentioned in the application. Thus, in my view, mere general and omnibus allegations in the application would not be sufficient to attract the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short "DV Act") to implead them in the proceedings as respondents. 6.
In such circumstances, in my view, in the absence of any specific role attributed to the applicant Nos. 3 to 6, so as to attract the ingredients of the provisions of the D. V. Act, it would be unjust and unfair to compel them to undergo the tribulations of a trial based on the general and omnibus allegations. However, the learned Magistrate has not considered the said facts and aspects and erred in proceeding against all the applicants. At the same time, the grounds raised in the application do not demonstrate that the applicants, Nos. 1 and 2, have not committed any domestic violence against the respondent.
7.
Having considered the same, in my view, it would not be proper to compel applicant Nos. 3 to 6 to undergo the tribulations of a trial. 8.
As a result, the application is partly allowed. The proceedings bearing PWDVA No.10 of 2023 pending before the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Nanded, are hereby quashed and set aside to the extent of applicant Nos. 3 to 6. The application against applicants Nos. 1 and 2 is dismissed. No order as to costs.
9.
Inform the learned Magistrate accordingly.
(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.)