Whether former wife is relative of husband and can be prosecuted for offence U/S 498A of IPC?

 It appears from the materials on record that the
respondent No.2 got married with one Rakeshkumar Bhavsar
in the year 1995. In the wedlock, two children were born. On
29.06.2001, Rakeshkumar Bhavsar passed away. After about
nine years from the date of the demise of Rakeshkumar
Bhavsar, the respondent No.2 got married with one
Bhavinbhai, i..e, the original accused No.1. Bhavinbhai was
married to the applicant herein. The marriage of Bhavinbhai
with the applicant was dissolved in a customary manner. It
appears that Bhavinbhai, after getting married to the
respondent No.2 herein, went back to his divorced wife, i.e.,
the applicant herein. This led to the matrimonial disputes
between the respondent No.2 and her husband, namely,
Bhavinbhai-original accused No.1. In the dispute between the
husband and wife, the applicant, who happens to be the first
wife of Bhavinbhai, has been arraigned as an accused. I am
informed that the applicant herein has also now got married
for the second time.
3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the

parties and having considered the materials on record, I am of
the view that even if the entire case of the prosecution is
believed or accepted to be true, none of the ingredients to
constitute the offence of cruelty within the meaning of section
498-A of the IPC are spelt out so far as the applicant herein is
concerned. Let us assume for the moment that the husband of
the respondent No.2 went back to his first wife, i.e., the
applicant herein, the fact remains that as the marriage was
dissolved, the applicant herein would not fall within the ambit
of “the relative of the husband”. Even otherwise, there is no
case worth the name against the applicant. The applicant may
be the cause for the matrimonial disputes between the
husband and wife, bu for that, she cannot be prosecuted for
the offence under section 498-A of the IPC.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 19574 of 2015

HONEYBEN ASHOKBHAI PATEL. Vs STATE OF GUJARAT 
CORAM:  MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date : 30/11/2017



1. By this application under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., 1973,
the applicant-original accused No.2 seeks to invoke the
inherent powers of this Court praying for quashing of the
proceedings of the Criminal Case No.1654 of 2012 pending
before the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara
arising from a first information report being C.R. No.I-96 of
2012 registered before the Makarpura Police Station, Vadodara
for the offence punishable under sections 498-A read with 114
of the IPC.
2. It appears from the materials on record that the
respondent No.2 got married with one Rakeshkumar Bhavsar
in the year 1995. In the wedlock, two children were born. On
29.06.2001, Rakeshkumar Bhavsar passed away. After about
nine years from the date of the demise of Rakeshkumar
Bhavsar, the respondent No.2 got married with one
Bhavinbhai, i..e, the original accused No.1. Bhavinbhai was
married to the applicant herein. The marriage of Bhavinbhai
with the applicant was dissolved in a customary manner. It
appears that Bhavinbhai, after getting married to the
respondent No.2 herein, went back to his divorced wife, i.e.,
the applicant herein. This led to the matrimonial disputes
between the respondent No.2 and her husband, namely,
Bhavinbhai-original accused No.1. In the dispute between the
husband and wife, the applicant, who happens to be the first
wife of Bhavinbhai, has been arraigned as an accused. I am
informed that the applicant herein has also now got married
for the second time.
3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the

parties and having considered the materials on record, I am of
the view that even if the entire case of the prosecution is
believed or accepted to be true, none of the ingredients to
constitute the offence of cruelty within the meaning of section
498-A of the IPC are spelt out so far as the applicant herein is
concerned. Let us assume for the moment that the husband of
the respondent No.2 went back to his first wife, i.e., the
applicant herein, the fact remains that as the marriage was
dissolved, the applicant herein would not fall within the ambit
of “the relative of the husband”. Even otherwise, there is no
case worth the name against the applicant. The applicant may
be the cause for the matrimonial disputes between the
husband and wife, bu for that, she cannot be prosecuted for
the offence under section 498-A of the IPC.
4. In the result, this application succeeds and is hereby
allowed. The proceedings of the Criminal Case No.1654 of
2012 pending before the learned Addl. Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Vadodara arising from a first information report
being C.R. No.I-96 of 2012 registered before the Makarpura
Police Station, Vadodara are hereby quashed. Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.

(J.B.PARDIWALA, J.)

Print Page