We are constrained to observe that police officials are not
investigating such cases in the manner they are required to.
There is no sensitivity that is shown, nor proper procedure is
adopted. 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 inquiry to the neighbours of the matrimonial
home. Statements are always recorded of the witnesses who are
either relatives of the wife or neighbours where her parents are
residing. Of course the lady would disclose the treatment that is
given to her parents and the relatives at the first place and their
statements would then be important, however, the other
possibilities involved and any other piece of evidence if available
is not at all considered by the investigating officers. {Para 5}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3263 OF 2023
Mohammad Muddassar Vs The State of Maharashtra
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &
ROHIT W. JOSHI, JJ.
PRONOUNCED ON : 10 JANUARY 2025
ORDER (Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.) :-
Present application has been filed under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure initially for quashing the FIR vide
Crime No.145 of 2023 dated 24.07.2023 registered with Sillod
City Police Station, District Aurangabad for the o@ences
punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with
Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and during pendency when
charge-sheet is filed it is for quashment of proceedings bearing
R.C.C. No.350 of 2023 pending before the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Sillod, District Aurangabad.
2. Heard learned Advocate Ms. Pooja S. Ingle holding for
learned Advocate Mr. S. J. Salunke for the applicants, learned
APP Mr. N. R. Dayama for respondent No.1/State and learned
Advocate Mr. A. L. Kanade for respondent No.2. In order to cut
short it can be said that all the Advocates have made
submissions in support of their respective contentions.
3. It is not in dispute that respondent No.2 got married to
applicant No.1 on 24.06.2022 as per Muslim rites. She states
that she was treated properly for about three months. Applicant
No.1 is the husband of the informant, applicant Nos.2 and 3 are
the parents of applicant No.1, applicant No.4 is the brother and
applicant No.5 is married sister of applicant No.1. Applicant No.6
is the husband of applicant No.5 and applicant No.7 is the cousin
brother of applicant No.1.
4. The informant is contending that after three months of
marriage all the accused persons started taunting her on the
ground that she is from village and is unable to cook food. She
has specifically stated that on the trifle domestic grounds she
was mentally and physically harassed, however, she has not given
the details except the said taunting. All the seven persons could
not have given taunts at one and the same time. Further, in the
entire FIR she has not stated as to why the married sister-in-law
and her husband were residing in house of her husband i.e.
applicant No.1. In the normal course, the married sister-in-law
and her husband would reside at the place where the husband of
the sister-in-law is residing. If we consider the address given by
the applicants, then of course applicant Nos.5 and 6 are also
residing at Aurangabad, but their house is di@erent and in a
different locality than the house of applicant Nos.1 to 4. Same is
as regards applicant No.7, who is the cousin brother of applicant
No.1. Informant has thereafter stated that her husband and
parents-in-law were asking her to bring amount of Rs.5,00,000/-
for getting permanency in employment of husband with Nagar
Parishad. She told them that her parents are poor and unable to
give the amount. Then applicant Nos.1 to 3 responded that if she
is unable to bring the amount, then she should not come for
cohabitation and on that count, she was harassed mentally and
physically time and again. Again the acts amounting to “physical
and mental cruelty” are not given. Statement that unless she
brings the amount she should not come for cohabitation without
any action will not amount to mental and physical harassment.
When the alleged demand is made has also not approximately
stated and for how much period the said demand persisted has
not been stated. She then states that she gave information about
the treatment given to her and her father who had in turn given
that information to their relative. All of them had come and tried
to persuade accused persons, but there was no settlement.
According to the informant since that date the accused persons
intensified harassment. Again the details are lacking. Then she
directly states that when she was in her parental house,
applicant No.1 went there and abused her. Thereafter, the other
accused persons i.e. applicant Nos.4 to 7 instigated applicant
Nos.1 to 3 for not to allow cohabitation of the informant with
applicant No.1. Threat was given that if she is unable to bring
the money then she will not be allowed to stay with them and she
would be killed. All these allegations are vague. When that
statement was made has also not been stated. As earlier stated it
is to be noted that she got married on 24.06.2022 and FIR has
been lodged on 24.07.2023. That means the married life of which
narration has been given is of just more than one year. Out of
that three months she was treated properly and when she
returned to the parental home has not been stated. 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.
There cannot be statement in the form of copy paste paragraph to
paragraph without difference in punctuations and fonts also.
Unnecessarily energy has been wasted in drawing panchanama of
the house of applicant No.1 and even photographs have been
taken on the mobile and then certificate under Section 65-B of
Indian Evidence Act has been given.
5. We are constrained to observe that police officials are not
investigating such cases in the manner they are required to.
There is no sensitivity that is shown, nor proper procedure is
adopted. 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 inquiry to the neighbours of the matrimonial
home. Statements are always recorded of the witnesses who are
either relatives of the wife or neighbours where her parents are
residing. Of course the lady would disclose the treatment that is
given to her parents and the relatives at the first place and their
statements would then be important, however, the other
possibilities involved and any other piece of evidence if available
is not at all considered by the investigating officers. It is not even
necessary that the charge-sheet should be filed against all those
persons who are named in the FIR as well as statements of
witnesses. If those accused are residing at far away place, then
how that accused would have been involved in the commission of
the offence should be considered by the investigating officer. It is
in the wisdom of the investing o-cer to file charge-sheet against
those accused only against whom there is strong evidence.
Unnecessary harassment and false implication should be
avoided.
6. In the present case, the FIR is as vague as possible and it is
not disclosing the basic ingredients of the offences punishable
under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of
Indian Penal Code and, therefore, this is a fit case for exercising
powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to
avoid the unjust trial against the applicants. Hence, following
order :-
ORDER
I) Criminal Application stands allowed.
II) The First Information Report bearing Crime No.145 of
2023 dated 24.07.2023 registered with Sillod City Police
Station, District Aurangabad for the offences punishable
under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34
of Indian Penal Code as well as the proceedings in R.C.C.
No.350 of 2023 pending before the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Sillod, District Aurangabad, stand
quashed and set aside as against the present applicants.
[ ROHIT W. JOSHI ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ]
JUDGE JUDGE
No comments:
Post a Comment