GAURAV SHARAD NALESHWAR AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2026:BHC-AUG:38748-DB




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                         CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3993 OF 2023

           1. Gaurav s/o Sharad Naleshwarkar
           2. Shailaja s/o Sharad Naleshwarkar               ...Applicants

                 VERSUS

           1. The State of Maharashtra
           2. Tanvi d/o Sanjay Nyayadhish                   ...Respondents
                                            ...
           Mr. V. S. Wakale, Advocate for Applicants
           Party-in-person, for Respondent No.2
           Mr. N. R. Dayama, APP for Respondent – State
                                            ...

                                             CORAM     : R. M. JOSHI, J.
                                             DATE      : 21st AUGUST, 2026

           PER COURT :-

           1.           After hearing Learned Counsel for Applicants as well as

           Respondent-in-person and when this court has shown disinclination

           to grant relief to Applicant No. 1- husband, learned Counsel for

           Applicants, on instructions, seeks withdrawal of the application qua

           Applicant No. 1. Thus, application qua Applicant No. 1 stands

           dismissed as withdrawn leaving the present adjudication confined

           solely to the remaining Applicant No. 2.


           2.           By this Application, under Section 482 of the Code of

           Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”), the Applicant No. 2


           APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt                                            1 of 7
seeks quashment of the proceedings pending before the Judicial

Magistrate First Class (JMFC), Aurangabad bearing RCC No.

1014/2023 arising out of First Information Report (FIR) bearing

Crime No. 028/2022 dated 02.02.2022, registered at Osmanpura

Police Station, District Aurangabad, for the offences punishable

under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian

Penal Code (for short “IPC”) and under Section 3 and 4 of the

Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and subsequently Section 406 of IPC

came to be added against the Applicants.


3.          The aforesaid First Information Report was lodged by the

Respondent No. 2 against her husband (Applicant No.1) and her

mother-in law (Applicant No. 2). The marriage of the Applicant

No.1 and the Respondent No. 2 was solemnized on 25.04.2018 at

Aurangabad according to Hindu rites and customs. Applicants made

the Respondent No.2 to secure loan for buying a house at Pune and

demanded money from the father of the respondent No. 2 for the

furniture required for the said house. Thereafter, when the

Respondent No. 2 could not fulfill some demands, the Applicants

subjected her to physical assault causing hurt, verbal and financial

abuse and mental cruelty. On the basis of these allegations, FIR

was registered on 02.02.2022 and thereafter, on 10.05.2022 the


APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt                                         2 of 7
chargesheet came to be filed, process has been issued against the

Applicants, so also Charges were framed on 19.12.2022.


4.          Learned Counsel for Applicant submits that the First

Information Report is lodged on basis of false and concocted story,

which amounts to abuse of the process of law. It is further

submitted that the       allegations   lack basis, particularly when

Applicants No. 2 and her Husband resided separately in rented

premises because her husband was suffering from cancer. Learned

Counsel points out that the specific allegation of forcing the

Respondent No. 2 to secure loan is completely twisted and submits

that it was Respondent No. 2 who wanted to purchase the flat and

insisted the Applicants even after their denial due to financial

incapacity of the Applicant No. 1. Thereafter, the Respondent No. 2

requested them to pay the consideration amount and stated that

she will pay the installments from her salary. He submits that for

the happiness of the Respondent No. 2, Applicant No. 2 and her

husband paid 16 Lakhs to the builder and purchased 3 Lakhs for

the furniture, this fact is admitted by the Respondent No. 2 in her

Application under Domestic Violence Act, before Learned JMFC,

Aurangabad.




APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt                                          3 of 7
5.          Learned Counsel for the Applicant further submits that

when the Applicant No. 2 came to Pune for the treatment of her

husband, Respondent No. 2 had not permitted Applicant No.2 and

her deceased husband to reside in the premises where the

Applicant No. 1 and the Respondent No. 2 were residing. Therefore,

Applicants rented a room and it was not possible for Applicant No.

1 to leave Applicant No. 2 and his father in such condition. He

further submits that the allegations made in the FIR in relation to

the hurt caused to the Respondent No.2 by the Applicants are

nowhere to be seen in her earlier complaints before JMFC or

proceedings filed before the Women Cell. Moreover, the allegation

against Applicant No. 2 in relation to the possession of the Stridhan

are completely false since the Respondent No. 2 being a working

woman the ornaments were kept in locker, thereafter the Applicant

has duly received her Stridhan as has been admitted by her.

Therefore, the allegations under Section 406 IPC would not be

attracted. Lastly, he submits that the FIR lacks specific allegations

and it is lodged with malafide intention to harass the Applicants

and thus the continuance of proceedings pending before the

Learned Magistrate would amount to abuse of process of law.




APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt                                          4 of 7
6.          Learned APP and Party-in-person/Respondent No. 2

submits that the application for quashing deserves dismissal, as the

FIR clearly shows prima facie case of cruelty and illegal dowry

demands under Section 498-A of the IPC. They strongly oppose

grant of any relief to the present Applicants in view of the

seriousness of the offence.


7.          The Respondent No. 2 appearing as Party-in-person

empathetically submits that during her marriage with Applicant No.

1, her parents provided gold ornaments alongside household items.

Following the marriage, the couple relocated to Pune in a rented

premise, where she paid a monthly rent. It is alleged that during

this cohabitation, Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 along with his late father

subjected the Respondent No.2 to persistent physical assault and

verbal taunts, so also the Applicant No. 2 unlawfully retained the

Stridhan of Respondent No. 2. It is further argued that to purchase

a residential flat in Pune, she was compelled to pay booking

amount and forced to secure a home loan. She further submits that

Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 continuously pressured her to fetch funds

from her father to furnish the premises, threatening her with

divorce.




APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt                                         5 of 7
8.          Bare perusal of the investigation papers shows that

there is no sufficient material on record to establish that the

Applicant No. 2 has caused cruelty and hurt to the Respondent

No.2. The record indicates that the Applicant No.2 resides

separately distant from matrimonial home, even though they were

residing together at earlier point of time, there are no specific

allegations against Applicant No. 2 of causing harassment to the

Respondent No.2. Moreover, as far as the allegations under section

406 of IPC are concerned, the Respondent No. 2 has admitted that

she has duly received her Stridhan. This Court also finds substance

in the contention of the Counsel for Applicant that the contribution

of the Respondent No. 2 who was earning member of family, for

purchase of the flat or payment of E.M.I. per se would not

constitute demand of dowry and offence under penal law.


9.           At this point, reference can be made to the judgments

of the Hon’able Supreme Court in case of Anand Kumar Mohatta vs

State (NCT of Delhi), 2019 11 SCC 706, State of Haryana vs

Bhajan Lal, (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335, Sanjay Kumar Rai vs State

of Uttar Pradesh, (2021) SCC OnLine Sc 367 wherein observations

are made with regards to quashment of first information report and

proceedings even after Charges are framed, if the trial continues, it


APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt                                          6 of 7
would amount to abuse of process of court. Therefore, to prevent

unwarranted harassment arising from matrimonial discord, the

application deserves to be allowed qua Applicant No. 2.


10.         In view of above, application is allowed in terms of

prayer clauses ‘B’ and ‘B1’ to the extent of Applicant No. 2.


                                            (R. M. JOSHI, J.)
Umesh




APPLN 3993 OF 2023.odt                                          7 of 7