1 Cri.Appln.Nos.4361/2010 & 5134/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4362/2010 1) Ravi Vithal Kshetraphale. 2) Gaulan @ Mandakini w/o Ravi Kshetraphale. - APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra. Through Police Inspector, Ambejogai Police Station, District Beed and Anr. - RESPONDENTS ***** Mr.Sachin Deshmukh, Advocate for Applicants; Mr.G.R.Ingole, APP for State. ----- AND CRI.APPLICATION NO.5134 of 2010 Dr.Sau. Sujata w/o Nandkishor Somwanshi. - APPLICANT versus The State of Maharashtra. Through Incharge Police Station, Ambejogai Police Station, District Beed and Anr. - RESPONDENTS ***** Mr.HM Karwa, Advocate for Applicant; Mr.G.R.Ingole, APP for State. ----- 2 Cri.Appln.Nos.4361/2010 & 5134/2010 CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 16th June, 2011. PER COURT : 1) Mr.MD Shinde appears for respondent no.2 in Criminal Application No.5134/2010. He assures to file power during course of day. 2) Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties extensively. Respondent No.2 served, absent. 3) Matrimonial discord between respondent no.2 – Smt. Deepa Pawar and her husband – Dr.Tushar, has indeed led to filing the matrimonial proceedings by Dr. Tushar against his wife Smt.Deepa. No sooner summonses were served, it appears as counter to the matrimonial proceedings initiated by said Dr.Tushar. FIR dated 10th August, 2008 is lodged, implicating the applicants. It is curious, the complainant, respondent no.2 asserts that she was driven out in February 2008. She waited for sufficient long period and no sooner she saw that she has been prosecuted by her husband Dr.Tushar, with severence of matrimonial knot, she, with all might at her end, has prosecuted by the said FIR. So far as these two applicants are concerned, i.e. Ravi Vithal Kshetraphale and Gaulan 3 Cri.Appln.Nos.4361/2010 & 5134/2010 Shetraphale, they are distance relatives, i.e. Maternal father-in-law and maternal mother-in-law of the complainant – Smt. Deepa. 4) Reading the FIR as a whole, a sweeping reference is made, without attributing any overt act on the part of these two applicants. The sweeping reference is application of fertile mind to ensure that the family members are roped to have pressure on the husband or in-laws. 5) Taking these aspects into consideration, the prosecution as against the present applicants, is nothing but an abuse of the process and they are falsely implicated. Consequently the FIR vide Crime No.121/2010, dated 10th August, 2010 registered at police station Ambejogai for an offence under Sections 498-A, 323 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code to the extent of these applicants is set aside. Criminal Application No.4362/2010 is allaowed in above terms. 6) The applicant – Dr.Sujata in Criminal Application No.5134/2010 is in service and married. She is roped in the FIR dated 10th August, 2010. Reading the same it appears, the intention of the complainant is to create presure and consequently, she has been involved with 4 Cri.Appln.Nos.4361/2010 & 5134/2010 alleations of instigation/goading. The applicant being a married lady, residing with her husband, she has remote concern with the matrimonial loggerhead between Dr.Tushar and Smt. Deepa. Consequently, prosecution initiated against the applicant – Smt.Dr.Sujata, vide Crime No.121/2010 registered with Ambejogai police Station, for the offence under Section 498-A 323 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code, is quashed. Criminal Application No. 5134/2010 is allowed as above. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/