RAJIV YASHWANT SALVE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

                               -1-
                                                criappln389.24.odt

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

          981 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 389 OF 2024

1.   Rajiv s/o Yashwant Salve,
     Age: 63 years, Occ: Retired,
     R/o. Achal Residency, Vinayak Nagar,
     Ahmednagar Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar

2.   Ranjana w/o Rajiv Salve
     age 60 years, occ. Household
     R/o. Achal Residency, Vinayak Nagar,
     Ahmednagar Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar

3    Praffulkumar s/o Rajiv Salve
     age 32 years, occ. Govt. Service
     R/o. Achal Residency, Vinayak Nagar,
     Ahmednagar Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar

4.   Prabhuddha s/o Rajiv Salve
     age 25 years, occ. Service
     r/o Pune.                                ...APPLICANTS

     VERSUS

1.   The State of Maharashtra
     Through Superintendent of Police
     Beed, Dist. Beed.

2.   The Police Inspector
     Police Station, Ambhora
     Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed.

3.   Anita w/o Vijay Ghatvisave
     age 36 years, occ. Household
     r/o village Pimpalgaon Ghat,
     Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed.                   ...RESPONDENTS

Ms. Sushma T. Jadhav, Advocate for the Applicants.
Mr. C. V. Bhadane, APP for the State.
Mr. G. R. Syed, Advocate for Respondent No. 3.
                                 -2-
                                                      criappln389.24.odt

                               CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
                               DATE  : 28th JANUARY, 2026.
PER COURT :


1.    Applicants have preferred this application under Section 482 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashment of FIR No.

103/2023 registered with Ambhora Police Station, Tq. Ashti District

Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 323, 504, 506

read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and consequent

proceedings in RCC No. 222/2023 pending on the file of learned

Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ashti, Dist. Beed.



2.    The aforesaid crime came to be registered pursuant to the First

Information Report No. 103/2023 lodged by Respondent No. 3

alleging therein that on 04.06.2023 at about 3.00 pm, when she

alongwith her father-in-law and sister-in-law were sitting infront of

their house, Applicants herein came there and abused them on the

count of civil dispute pending between them.          When she tried to

pacify the incident, the Applicants herein assaulted her father-in-law

with fists and kicks and Applicant No. 1 abused and threatened her

and outraged her modesty.
                                  -3-
                                                     criappln389.24.odt

3.    Learned   Counsel    for   the    Applicants   submits   that   the

allegations against Applicant Nos. 3 and 4 in the First Information

Report are entirely false, frivolous and concocted.     Except for bald

assertions, no specific overt act attracting the alleged offences is

attributed against them. It is further submitted that a civil dispute is

pending between the parties and the present First Information Report

is lodged as a counterblast to the pending civil dispute and First

Information Report lodged by Applicant No. 1 on the very same day

against Respondent No. 3 and her family members.



4.    It is his further submission that Applicant No. 3 is serving in

defence department and at the time of the alleged incident he had

undergone surgery at Ahilyanagar and was unable to even walk.

Similarly, Applicant No. 4 is serving at Pune and at the time of the

alleged incident he was present at Pune. It is his further submission

that, in her supplementary statements, recorded on 31.08.2023 and

04.09.2023, the informant has specifically stated that Applicants

Nos. 3 and 4 were not present on the spot at the time of the alleged

incident and their names were inadvertently added in the complaint.

Consequently, the prosecution initiated against Applicant Nos. 3 and
                                 -4-
                                                   criappln389.24.odt

4 is a sheer abuse of the process of law and is liable to be quashed

and set aside.



5.    Per contra, learned APP and learned Counsel for Respondent

No. 3 vehemently opposed the application submitting that offence

under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code is a serious offence. They

further submit that the allegations in the First Information Report

sufficiently establish complicity of the Applicants in the alleged

crime. As such, the application does not warrant consideration and

is liable to be rejected.



6.    Upon hearing learned Counsel for the litigating sides and

perusal of the record, including charge-sheet, it is evident that

allegations are general and omnibus in nature.        Except for bald

assertions, no specific overt act is attributed to Applicant Nos. 3 and

4. The allegations in the First Information Report, even if taken at

face value, do not disclose essential ingredients of Sections 354, 323,

504 and 506 against Applicant Nos. 3 and 4.



7.    The record further indicates that there is a civil dispute

between the parties concerning agricultural land. Further, it appears
                                  -5-
                                                    criappln389.24.odt

from record that several First Information Reports are lodged by

Applicant No. 1 against the informant and her family members. In

that view of the matter, it is evident that the informant has lodged

the present First Information Report to counterblast the complaint

lodged by Applicant No. 1 or as a retaliation to the earlier complaints.



8.    Perusal of record further indicates that Applicant No. 3

Prafullakumar is working in defence department at Ahilyanagar and

had undergone surgery on 23.05.2023 as a result of which he was

unable to walk at the time of the alleged incident.           Similarly,

Applicant No. 4 Prabuddha is working at Pune.        Furthermore, the

informant in her supplementary statements recorded on 31.08.2023

and 04.09.2023 has specifically stated that Applicant Nos. 3 and 4

were not present on the spot at the time of the alleged incident and

their names were inadvertently recorded in the complaint.



9.    Thus, on perusal of record it appears that the dispute between

the parties is personal in nature and the criminal proceedings have

been initiated to coofer cloak of criminality to the private dispute.

Though the offence under Section 354 is non-compoundable, this

Court is of the considered view that the allegations do not disclose a
                                 -6-
                                                    criappln389.24.odt

prima facie offence against Applicant Nos. 3 and 4 and therefore,the

bar of non-compoundability does not operate in the facts of the

present case.



10.     In view of material on record, when this Court has shown

disinclination to consider application in favour of Applicant Nos. 1

and 2, learned Counsel for Applicants, seeks leave to withdraw

application to the extent of Applicant Nos. 1 and 2.



11.   Leave granted. Application stands dismissed against Applicant

Nos. 1 and 2 as withdrawn.



12.   Thus, in view of the above states facts, no      useful purpose

would be served by permitting the prosecution to continue against

Applicant Nos. 3 and 4 and continuation of the criminal proceedings

against them would amount to sheer abuse of process of law.



13.   Accordingly, the application stands allowed in terms of prayer

clause ‘B’ and ‘B-1’, qua Applicant Nos. 3 and 4.
                                -7-
                                                  criappln389.24.odt

14.   The impugned complaint i.e. First Information Report No.

103/2023 registered with Ambhora Police Station, Tq. Ashti, Dist

Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 323, 504, 506

read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, charge-sheet No.

143/2023 and consequential proceeding in RCC No. 222/2023

pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,

Ashti, Dist. Beed, stand quashed and set aside qua Applicant Nos. 3

and 4.



15.   Needless to state that the Trial Court shall proceed as against

Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 in accordance with law.




                                         (SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.)

dyb