Kailas Vinayakrao Shirsath And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2026:BHC-AUG:11795-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4273 OF 2024
1. Kailas Vinayakrao Shirsath Age- 29 years, Occu. Labour, R/o. Nandur Shingote, Tq.Sinnar, Dist.Nashik.
2. Vinayak Arjun shirsath, Age- 59 years, Occu.Labour, R/o. Nandur Shingote, Tq.Sinnar, Dist.Nashik.
3. Alaka Vinayak Shirsath, Age-58 years, Occu.Household, R/o. Nandur Shingote, Tq.Sinnar, Dist.Nashik.
4. Ravindra Vinayak Shirsath, Age- 32 years, Occu-labour, R/o. Nandur Shingote, Tq.Sinnar, Dist.Nashik.
5. Chitra Sunil Ghegadmal, Age- 37 years, Occu. Hosehold, R/o.Near Maruti Mandir at Jamgaon, Tq.Sinnar, Dist. Nashik.
6. Sunil Vithoba Ghegadmal Age- 56 years, Occu. labour, R/o,Near Maruti Mandir at Jamgaon, Tq.Sinnar, Dist.Nashik.
..APPLICANTS
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra Through the Police Station, Mukundwad1, Tq. & Dist. Chh. Samabhajinagar.
2. Rupali w/o Kailas Shirsath Age-29 years, Occu. Household, 1 / 5
R/o Sanjay Nagar, Lane no 9, Mukundwadi, Tq & Dist. Aurangabad.
..RESPONDENTS ....
Mr. N.N. Bhagwat, Advocate for applicants Mr. A.R. Kale, Addl.P.P. for respondent no.1 - State Mr. P.B. Wagmare, Advocate for respondent no.2 ....
CORAM : RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.
DATE : 16th MARCH, 2026 PER COURT :
.
This is an application for quashing of F.I.R. No. 352 of 2024 and consequent charge-sheet and Regular Criminal Case No. 363 of 2025 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Aurangabad. Learned counsel for the applicants/original accused has also taken exception to the order taking cognisance of the order.
2.
In short, it is the case of learned counsel for the applicant that Applicant No.1 is the husband of Respondent No.2 - informant, whereas Applicant No.2 is the father-in-law, Applicant No.3 is the mother-in-law, Applicant No.4 is the brother-in-law, Applicant No.5 is the married sister-inlaw and Applicant No.6 is the husband of sister-in-law. According to learned counsel for the applicants, marriage between Applicant No.1 and Respondent No.2 solemnized on 23rd April, 2023 and Respondent No.2 left the company on 13th January, 2024 and thereafter F.I.R. was lodged on 05th September, 2024. He submitted that the allegations made against the applicants are 2 / 5
vague. He further submitted that so far as case of Applicant No.1 / husband is concerned, he is not pressing the application and he be granted liberty to prefer an application for discharge before the trial Court. In view of the same, criminal application, so far as Applicant No.1 - Kailas Vinayakrao Shirsath is concerned, is disposed of as not pressed and permission to prefer an application for discharge is granted.
3.
Per contra, learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for Respondent no.2 / informant have submitted that the allegations made in the F.I.R. makes out prima facie case. There was continuous harassment at the instance of present applicants.
4.
With the help of respective counsels, I have gone through the record of the case and have taken arguments into consideration. 5.
The marriage between Applicant No.1 and the informant was solemnized on 23rd April, 2023. It is the case of informant / Respondent No.2 in the F.I.R. that initially she was treated properly, but thereafter all the applicants started harassing her on the count of demanding money for constructions of the house. It is further alleged in the F.I.R. that the father-inlaw, mother-in-law so also her husband and brother of the husband also used to pass remarks and harass the Respondent No.2 by giving ill-treatment. It is 3 / 5
further alleged that the husband was instigated by other family members and due to which he used to beat her. The record further shows that on 10th February, 2024, husband left the house and after 2-3 days returned back. On that count also other applicants blamed Respondenet No.2. The record further shows that on 13th January, 2024 she was slapped and thereafter not allowed to enter the house.
6.
At this stage it is necessary to mention here that so far as the allegations against the in-laws and brother, sister and husband of sister are concerned, they are totally vague and omnibus. It is further pertinent to mention here that the F.I.R. in crime was registered on 05th September, 2024 for commission of offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas according to the case of informant, she was not allowed to enter on 31st January, 2024. The delay in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case also goes to the root of the matter. Considering the fact and there are no specific allegations against the in-laws, brother and sister of husband, so also the husband of sister, and the allegations are omnibus, I am inclined to allow the application so far as Applicant Nos. 2 to 6 are concerned. Hence, I pass the following order :-
ORDER
(I) Criminal application stands disposed of as withdrawn so far as Applicant No.1 is concerned.
4 / 5
(II) Criminal Application is allowed to the extent of Applicant Nos. 2 to 6 are concerned.
(III) The F.I.R. No. 352 of 2024 dated 05th September, 2024 registered with Mukundwadi Police Station, Dist. Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar for commission of offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and consequent chargesheet thereupon which culminated in registration of Regular Criminal Case No. 363 of 2025 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Aurangabad is quashed and set aside, so far as Applicant Nos. 2 to 6 are concerned. ( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. ) SSD 5 / 5