Mohan Bhagwat Chavhan And Other v. State Of Maharashtra Through Police Station Oficer Police Station Lonar Dist Buldana And Another
1 / 3 903.apl1626..2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1626 OF 2024 Mohan s/o Bhagwat Chavhan and Ors.
Vs.
State of Maharashtra, Thru. PSO, PS Lonar, Dist. Buldhana and anr. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. H.V. Dhage, Advocate for applicants.
Ms. M.H. Deshmukh, APP for non-applicant No.1/State. Mr. G.R. Kothari, Advocate for non-applicant No.2. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 03.04.2025.
After hearing for sometime, the learned counsel for the applicant states that he does not want to proceed with the matter as against the applicant No.1, hence, the application is dismissed against the applicant No.1.
2.
By the present application, the applicant is seeking to quash and set aside the FIR in Crime No.312/2024 registered with Police Station Lonar, District: Buldhana, for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
2 / 3 903.apl1626..2024 3.
In short, the case of prosecution is that the non-applicant No.2 on 28.09.2024 lodged a police complaint against the applicants. It is stated that after her marriage on 05.05.2015, she started residing with her husband at Kalyan. It is alleged that applicant Nos.2 & 3 used to torture her. They used to say that informant does not know the household work. She doesn't suit in their house. They always used to insult her. It is further alleged that a demand of Rs.10,00,000/- was made to purchase a flat at Mumbai. Hence, the offence was registered against the present applicants with Police Station Lonar, District : Buldhana.
4.
We have heard the learned counsel for applicants and learned APP for the State and learned counsel for non-applicant No.2.
5.
After going through the FIR, it is clear that the vague and general allegations are levelled against the applicant Nos.2 and 3. No specific allegations have been made or any specific role attributed against them. 6.
The learned counsel for the applicant has rightly relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Geeta Mehrotra and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr. reported in 2012 (10) SCC 741, to state that if there are allegations of general and
3 / 3 903.apl1626..2024 vague nature like in the present case, then in absence of any specific accusation, it would be unjust to force them to undergo for trial. Hence, relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we are of the considered view that no case is made out against the applicant Nos.2 and 3. Accordingly, we pass the following order :
(i) The application is dismissed against the applicant No.1.
(ii) The criminal application is allowed against the applicant Nos.2 and 3.
(iii) The FIR in Crime No.312/2024 registered with Police Station Lonar, District: Buldhana, for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, is hereby quashed and set aside against the applicant Nos.2 and 3 only.
(iv) No order as to costs.
7.
The Criminal application is disposed of accordingly.
(Pravin S. Patil, J.) (Anil S. Kilor, J.)