Bombay High Court: In the present case, the wife had filed an FIR under Section 498-A of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), and had included the name of her husband’s friend, who had instigated her husband to commit cruelty against her. The Division Bench of Anil L. Pansare and M.M. Nerlikar*, JJ., held that a friend could not be said to be a relative as he was neither a blood relative nor had any relation through marriage or adoption. Thus, the Court quashed the FIR, emphasizing that a “friend” was not a relative under Section 498-A IPC.
An FIR was filed by a wife against her husband, in-laws, and husband’s friend, under Section 498-A, read with Section 34 of IPC. The wife had alleged that the friend used to come to her house and instigate her husband, and it was to such a great extent that the husband demanded to be given a plot and a car, from the wife’s parents. The friend also tried to convince the husband that if his demands were not fulfilled then he should not cohabit with her and should send her to her paternal home.
Aggrieved by the FIR and further criminal proceedings, the applicants, therefore, approached the Court, seeking quashing of the FIR.
Analysis, Law and decision
The Court noted that the main issue was to determine “whether a ‘friend’ could be said to be a ‘relative’ of husband within the scope of Section 498-A IPC?”.
The Court relied on Dechamma I.M. v. State of Karnataka, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3853, wherein the Supreme Court had dealt with a similar issue and observed that the word “relative” brings within its purview a status, which must be conferred either by blood or marriage or adoption.
Thus, the Court held that a friend could not be said to be a relative as he was neither a blood relative nor he was having any relation through marriage or adoption, therefore, a friend of husband would not fall under the definition of “relative” of the husband as contemplated under Section 498-A of IPC. Accordingly, the Court allowed the application and quashed and set aside the case arising out of the said FIR against the husband’s friend.
[Narendra v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 2788, decided on: 29-7-2025]
*Judgement authored by- Justice M.M. Nerlikar
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Advocate for the Applicants- S.A. Mohta, Advocate
Advocate for the Non-Applicants- S.S. Jachak, Addl. Public Prosecutor; S. Patrikar, Advocate
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
