Allahabad High Court

SALMAN KHAN AND 3 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 26 April 2026
Bench: SAMIT GOPAL

Holding

The Court held that while the charge sheet against the husband (Salman Khan) must stand, the proceedings against the other family members lack sufficient specific evidence and are therefore quashed under Section 482.

Summary

The applicants Salman Khan, Gulshan Khan, Irfan Khan and Nikhat Khan filed a Section 482 application seeking to quash the charge sheet and summons in a criminal case alleging dowry harassment, cruelty and assault under Sections 498‑A, 323, 506 IPC, the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act. The FIR, lodged by Alisha Khan, alleged that Salman Khan demanded dowry and subjected her to physical torture, with medical evidence of fresh injuries. The applicants contended that the allegations were vague, the injuries pre‑dated the FIR, and that the family members (applicants 2‑4) were falsely implicated. The State and the complainant opposed the quash, presenting medical reports, telephonic and WhatsApp evidence, and a dismissed divorce petition to show ongoing dowry demand. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that family members can be implicated in matrimonial disputes but also on the lack of specific evidence against the three family members, the Court dismissed the application against Salman Khan but allowed it in respect of the other three applicants, quashing the charge sheet and summons for them. The trial court was directed to proceed expeditiously against Salman Khan without undue adjournments.

Issues considered

The propriety of exercising the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the charge sheet and summons in a dowry harassment case.
Whether the allegations against the family members (applicants 2‑4) are sufficiently specific to sustain criminal proceedings.
Whether the medical evidence and timing of injuries undermine the FIR allegations.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 498-A, 506
Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act, 2019 — s. 3, 4
Special Marriage Act — s. 27(9)

Subjects

dowry harassment
cruelty
Section 498-A
Section 482
quash of criminal proceedings
family members liability
matrimonial dispute
IPC
Dowry Prohibition Act
Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8273 of 2023

Salman Khan And 3 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Aman Patel, Gaurav Gupta, Neeraj Singh
Yadav, Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Rakesh Dubey,
Ray Sahab Yadav, Saurabh Pandey, Shashi
Chood Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Abhinay Bhattacharya, Fakhruzzaman, G.A.,
Prem Narayan Singh, Saurabh Basu, Utkarsh
Srivastava

Court No. - 75
HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Rakesh Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Anil
Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Prem Narayan Singh,
learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh,
learned counsel for the State and perused the records.

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the
applicants Salman Khan, Smt. Gulshan Khan @ Smt. Gulsana, Irfan Khan
and Nikhat Khan @ Nighat Khan, with the prayers to quash the charge
sheet dated 17.10.2022 as well as summoning order dated 11.01.2023 and
entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 373 of 2023 (State Vs. Salman
Khan and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0465 of 2021, under
Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act and Section 3/4 of
Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act, 2019, P.S.
Kotwali, District Jhansi, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Jhansi and with a further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the
aforesaid case, during the pendency of the present application.

4. Perused the order dated 02.04.2026 passed by this Court which reads as
under:

"1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Rakesh Dubey and Sri Shashi Chood Pandey, learned counsels for the applicants, Sri Prem
Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for
State and perused the records.

3. Learned counsels for the applicants submits that although two rejoinder affidavits dated 14.10.2025
and 08.01.2026 have been filed in the present matter but the rejoinder affidavit dated 14.10.2025 is
A482 No. 8273 of 2023
2

having typographical errors and prays that the same be not considered and be dismissed as not pressed.

4. As prayed, the rejoinder affidavit dated 14.10.2025 is dismissed as not pressed.

5. Counter affidavit of the opposite party no.2 dated 21.07.2024 and supplementary counter affidavit
dated 04.05.2025 are on record to which a rejoinder affidavit dated 08.01.2026 has been filed which is
also on record.

6. The pleadings in the matter are thus complete and the matter is ripe for hearing.

7. The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 13.03.2023. As per the
report dated 26.05.2023 of the Mediation & Conciliation Centre the mediation has completed but no
agreement could be arrived between the parties and mediation thus has failed.

8. The matter is to be decided on merits.

9. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that the matter is to be argued by Sri Anil
Srivastava, learned Senior Advocate who is on his legs in another Court and prays for adjournment in the
matter for three weeks.

10. Prayer is allowed.

11. Let the matter be listed on 27.04.2026.

12. Interim order, if any, shall remain in currency till the next date of listing.

5. The facts of the case are that a First Information Report dated
07.10.2021 was lodged by the opposite party no.2/Smt. Alisha Khan for
offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act and
Section 3/4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Right on Marriage) Act,
2019 against the applicants alleging therein that she was married to the
applicant no.1/Salman Khan on 12.02.2018 in Lucknow. In the
engagement, as per demand of the accused, her parents had done the
marriage in Rs. 10 lakh. Her husband is a Lieutenant Commander in
Naval Station, Mumbai. She was residing at her matrimonial house in
Lucknow where there was a demand of Rs. 5 lakh from them. Her
husband had brought her to Lucknow from Mumbai where the accused
were torturing her. She gave birth to a child in Military Hospital,
Lucknow who is aged about two years. When her parents made a
complaint about her torturing and demand of dowry to Senior Officials of
the Department an inquiry was initiated and just to save himself from the
inquiry they were pressurized and the complaint was withdrawn. She was
not kept properly. In April, 2021 she was with her husband in Mumbai
where her husband was demanding Rs. 5 lakh and used to assault her. He
used to gag her mouth to commit torturing her and he used to talk to other
girls and show her their photographs. He used to tell that he was giving
her Talaque and marry again and torture her in this manner also. She
called her parents to Mumbai who consoled her husband but he did not
A482 No. 8273 of 2023
3

improve. On 07.04.2021 her parents brought her back to Jhansi where her
husband used to regularly threaten her on phone and no one came to take
her back. Her parents called the accused to Jhansi on 28.07.2021 for talks
but on the pretext of her father-in-law being ill he was not brought. The
accused told them to get Talaque and they would not keep to her. Her
husband insulted her in front of other people and stated of giving her
Talaque and then went back. Even on stopping them, they did not stop.
Their parents counselled them but they did not agree. On 26.08.2021 her
father-in-law died and on getting information she with her parents went to
the ancestral house in her matrimonial house during the last rites which
was to be performed. She went to Kanpur where also she was tortured and
the accused demanded Rs. 5 lakh from her and stated that only then they
would keep her or else Talaque has already been given. The accused are
adamant for dowry of Rs. 5 lakh. She has a child of two years. She gave
application on 15.09.2021 at the Mahila Thana where the parties were
called but the accused did not come. Report be lodged and action be
taken.

6. The victim was medically examined on 12.10.2020 at 11:45 pm at
District Hospital Jhansi. She was found to have received the following
injuries:

(i) Two linear abrasion of 5.0cm and 5.2cm long (Red in cl) +nt on (Lt.)
arm (Ant), 8.0cm above from (Lt.) elbow joint.

(ii) Multiple linear abrasion of various size of from 0.5cm to 1.5cm long
and reddish brown scab +nt on middle 1/3rd of Rt. arm (Anterolaterally).

(iii) Abrasion of 4.0cm x 1.5cm (Red in cl) middle 1/3rd of (Lt.) thigh
(Anterolaterally)

(iv) Three abrasion of size 6.0cm, 4.0cm and 3.5cm long (Red in cl) +nt
on upper 1/3rd of (Lt.) leg (Anteromedially).

(v) Abrasion of 15.0cm x 0.5cm and 12.0cm x 0.5cm (Red in cl) +nt two
upper back."

The doctor opined the injuries to be simple in nature and with regards
to the duration of injuries, the opinion was that they were fresh except
injury no.2 which is about 2-3 days old. All the injuries were opined to be
caused by friction.

7. The investigation in the matter concluded and a charge sheet dated
17.10.2022 was submitted against the applicants for offences under
Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. The Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Jhansi vide order dated 11.01.2023 took cognizance upon the
same and summoned the applicants for offences under Sections 498-A,
323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act.
A482 No. 8273 of 2023
4

8. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have
been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the
applicant no.1/Salman is the husband, applicant no.2/Smt. Gulshan Khan
@ Smt. Gulsana is the mother-in-law, applicant no.3/Irfan Khan is the
jeth and applicant no.4/Nikhat Khan @ Nighat Khan is the jethani of the
opposite party no.2/Smt. Alisha. It is submitted that in so far as the
alleged injuries are concerned, the same do not in any manner correspond
to the allegations in the FIR inasmuch as the injuries were examined on
12.10.2020 and were opined to be fresh whereas there is no allegation of
the victim as per the FIR of being assaulted during the said period. It is
submitted that in so far as the FIR is concerned, the allegations are vague
and omnibus. It is further submitted that the story as disclosed in the FIR
is improbable as on 26.08.2021 at the time of the last rites of her father-
in-law no family member would demand dowry at that point of time. It is
further submitted that further the story of calling of the parties on
28.07.2021 and the applicant no.1 insulting the opposite party no.2 is also
false and incorrect. It is further submitted that the allegations in so far as
the applicants is concerned, is totally concocted and is general and
omnibus in nature. It is submitted that the applicants have no criminal
history as stated in para 87 of the affidavit.

9. Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the
prayer for quashing and the arguments of learned counsel for the
applicants and submitted that the applicants are named in the FIR and
there are serious allegations against them. While placing annexure 6 to the
counter affidavit dated 21.07.2024 it is submitted that the first informant
received injuries and the photographs as annexed which would go to show
that she was tortured and assaulted. Further while placing annexure CA-7
and CA-8 to the said counter affidavit it is submitted that there were
telephonic conversion and whatsapp message between the applicant and
the opposite party no.2 which would go to show that there had been
continuous ill treatment and torture of the first informant. It is submitted
while placing annexure CA-9 to the said affidavit that petition for divorce
under Section 27(9) of the Special Marriage Act has been dismissed by
the Family Court vide judgment and order dated 29.09.2023 passed by the
Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jhansi. It is submitted that the
demand of dowry is continuing offence and in the present matter there has
been regular demand of dowry by the accused. It is submitted that the
present petition is devoid of any merit and be dismissed.

10. Learned counsel for the State also adopted the arguments of learned
counsel for the first informant and further supplemented that the
investigation in the matter concluded and charge sheet has been submitted
on which the court concerned has taken cognizance. The present petition
be thus dismissed.

11. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the
records, it is evident that the present case stems out from the marriage of
A482 No. 8273 of 2023
5

the applicant no.1/husband with opposite party no.2/wife. The FIR in the
matter states of demand of dowry by the applicant no.1 and then the other
applicants. It further states of cruelty and torturing by the applicant no.1 at
various instances. The victim has also received injuries which was
medically examined. In so far as the facturm of injuries and their veracity
is concerned, the same is a matter of trial. The allegations in so far as the
applicant nos. 2 to 4 are concerned, the same are general and omnibus.
The implication of family members of husband in matrimonial disputes is
very prevalent and common. It has been considered by the Apex Court in
the cases of Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and others Vs. State of
Bihar and others : (2022) 6 SCC 599, Payal Sharma Vs. State of
Punjab : AIR OnLine 2024 SC 792, Dara Lakshmi Narayan and
others vs. State of Telangana: 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3682, Preeti
Gupta and another vs. State of Jharkhand: (2010) 7 SCC 667 and
Geddam Jhansi vs. The State of Telangana: 2025 INSC 160.
No explanation whatsoever has been given regarding the delay in lodging
of the present FIR.

12. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court
on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising
powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as well as
cognizance/summoning order as prayed for by the applicant nos. 2 to 4.

13. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the application
with regards to the applicant no.1/Salman Khan/husband is concerned,
stands dismissed.

14. In so far as the other applicants being applicant no.2/Smt. Gulshan
Khan @ Smt. Gulsana, applicant no.3/Irfan Khan and applicant
no.4/Nikhat Khan @ Nighat Khan are concerned, stands allowed.

15. The entire proceedings, charge sheet dated 17.10.2022 as well as
summoning order dated 11.01.2023 of the aforesaid case are hereby
quashed with regards to the applicant no.2/Smt. Gulshan Khan @ Smt.
Gulsana, applicant no.3/Irfan Khan and applicant no.4/Nikhat Khan @
Nighat Khan only.

16. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

17. The trial court is directed to proceed expeditiously for the applicant
no.1/Salman Khan without granting undue adjournment to either of the
parties.

18. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

(Samit Gopal,J.)
April 27, 2026
M. ARIF

Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD ARIF
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…