The Bombay High Court quashed a cruelty case registered at the instance of a woman against her husband and family members and expressed concern over the fact that the Police Officials are not investigating such cases in the manner they are required to.

The Application before the High Court was filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of an FIR registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as the consequential proceedings.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Rohit W. Joshi stated, “It is in the wisdom of the investigating officer to file charge-sheet against those accused only against whom there is strong evidence. Unnecessary harassment and false implication should be avoided.”

Advocate Pooja S. Ingle appeared for the Appellants while Advocate N. R. Dayama represented the Respondent-State.

Factual Background

The informant got married to the first applicant as per Muslim rites. As per the allegations, after three months of the marriage, the informant’s husband and his family members (applicants) started taunting her on the ground that she came from a village and was unable to cook food. She had specifically stated that she was mentally and physically harassed on trifle domestic grounds. However, she didn’t give the details except the said taunting. The Informant had also stated that her husband and parents-in-law were asking her to bring an amount of Rs.5 lakh for getting permanency in employment of her husband with Nagar Parishad. It was further alleged that she was threatened that if she was unable to bring the money then she would not be allowed to stay with them.

Reasoning

On a perusal of the facts of the case and the allegations raised, the Bench said, “Statements of the witnesses are on the same line. All the witnesses have also kept those facts vague as they are. Neither the details about the alleged cruelty have been given, nor the date on which there was a meeting and when the informant came to the parental home has been stated. The statements of the witnesses are copy paste and it appears that the investigating o-cer has made maximum use of the computer, of course which is not for good reasons.”

The Bench further explained, “Statement that unless she brings the amount she should not come for cohabitation without any action will not amount to mental and physical harassment.”

As per the Bench, the police Officials are not investigating such cases in the manner they are required to. “Statements in the nature of copy paste is the example of non application of mind by the investigating officer (as he is supposed to apply his mind even while taking statement under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) and insensitivity. They do not make inquiries to the neighbors of the matrimonial home”, it held while further adding, “It is in the wisdom of the investing officer to file charge-sheet against those accused only against whom there is strong evidence.”

Noting that the FIR in question was as vague as possible and it didn’t disclose the basic ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the Bench quashed the same along with the consequential proceedings.

Cause Title: X & Ors. v. State Of Maharashtra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:BHC-AUG:594-DB)

Appearance:

Applicants: Advocates Pooja S. Ingle, S.J. Salunke

Respondent/State: Advocates N. R.Dayama, A. L. Kanade

Click here to read/download Order