1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 748 of 2009 Sk.Khaja Fahimoddin s/o Khaja Mohiyoddin ...APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and another. ...RESPONDENT ... Mrs. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr. V.D.Godbharle, APP, for respondent State. Mr. M.Gulam Mustafa, Adv., h/f Mr. Wayed Khan, Adv., for respondent no.2. ... CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE 9/10/2009 *** P.C.: 1. Heard. 2. Rule. By consent the matter is finally disposed of. 3. By exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the proceedings in Crime No.91/2008, registered at Beed City Police Station for the offense under Sections 498-A and 306 read with Section 34 of IPC are sought to be quashed by the applicant Sk.Khaja Fahimoddin s/o Khaja Mohiyoddin. 2 4. Counsel submits, the applicant is not a relation of the husband nor the deceased. He is a teacher serving at Neknoor while incident took place at least 35 kms away in the city of Beed. To highlight her submission, Counsel took recourse to the judgment in the matter of U.Suvetha Vs. State Inspector of Police and another (2009 AIRSCW 3491) contending that Section 498-A of IPC will not be applicable as against the accused/applicant. The Counsel submits, there is no question of any abetment. The trial will be an ordeal for the accused/applicant, his service will be put to stake and there will be an humiliation. // At this stage, reading the FIR of the victim, Smt.Shaikh Ifat Begum w/o Shaikh Laif dt. 14.10.2008, prima facie, indicts the accused/applicant named as Faim Sir as an instigator to her husband and after such instigation the husband was ill-treating the victim. The affairs reached its summit and as the victim could not tolerate the estranged situation, she committed suicide by setting herself ablaze. At this stage of the matter, the parameters in terms of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. will not be available. There cannot be a close analysis of the evidence at this stage. The FIR cannot be said to be a total falsehood to rope in the accused/applicant for some other vendetta. It 3 is not possible to observe that falliable acts are attributed against the accused. Though I find that there cannot be applicability of Section 498-A of IPC but since Section 306 of IPC is roped in, quashment, as sought, is rejected. Rule discharged. Liberty for appropriate proceedings before the Sessions Court. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/748-09crapl