Summary of Judgement
The Applicants sought to quash the proceedings in R.C.C. No. 2018 of 2013 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class (J.M.F.C.), Pimpri, Pune. These proceedings arose from an FIR initially registered at Satara Police Station in 2012, later transferred to Sanghvi Police Station, Pune. The case was filed by the complainant, the wife of the First Applicant, against him and his relatives. The Applicants argued that the complainant had previously filed similar allegations in 2006, which led to their acquittal, and that the current allegations were a misuse of Section 498-A IPC to harass them. The court noted that the complainant's allegations were repetitive, lacked credibility, and were made with the intent to harass. Consequently, the proceedings were quashed.
Introduction
- The Applicants seek quashing of proceedings in R.C.C. No. 2018 of 2013 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class (J.M.F.C.), Pimpri, Pune.
Background
- The First Applicant is the husband of the complainant. The other Applicants are his relatives.
- The case involves allegations of misuse of Section 498-A IPC to harass the in-laws.
History of the Case
- An FIR was registered by the complainant’s father in 2006, leading to a trial that ended in acquittal in 2007.
- In 2012, the complainant filed another FIR with similar allegations.
Proceedings and Arguments
- The court issued a notice to the Respondents; the complainant failed to appear.
- Mr. Nagvekar highlighted the similarities between the current and previous allegations, emphasizing the intent to harass.
- Mr. Chate, representing the State, could not present a substantial defense.
Court's Analysis
- The court found the allegations in the current FIR to be repetitive and lacking credibility.
- The complainant did not mention the previous FIR and acquittal in the current complaint.
- The court referenced Supreme Court rulings on the misuse of criminal proceedings for personal vendettas.
Conclusion
- The court concluded that the complainant misused the law enforcement agencies to harass the Applicants.
- The allegations were deemed insufficient to constitute a cognizable offense.
Judgment
15.1) The proceedings in R.C.C. No. 218 of 2013 were quashed and set aside. 16) Rule is made absolute.
Case Title: Hemant Sambhaji Pawar Ors. Versus The State Of Maharashtra Through Officer in Charge of Sagavi Police Station Ors.
Citation: 2024 Lawtext (BOM) (6) 283
Case Number: CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.995 OF 2015
Advocate(s): Mr. Omkar Nagvekar i/by Ms Prabha U. Badadare, for the Applicants. Mr. Vinod Chate APP, for Respondent No.1-State.
Date of Decision: 2024-06-28
