{"id":338791,"date":"2025-01-10T12:00:58","date_gmt":"2025-01-10T06:30:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=338791"},"modified":"2025-01-16T11:01:20","modified_gmt":"2025-01-16T05:31:20","slug":"husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Bombay High Court:<\/span> The present application was filed by Applicant 1-the complainant’s husband, with a prayer to quash FIR registered against applicants under Sections 489-A<\/a>1<\/sup><\/a>, 417<\/a>2<\/sup><\/a>, 506<\/a>3<\/sup><\/a><\/span>, and 34<\/a>4<\/sup><\/a> of Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’) in Vijapur Naka police station, Solapur and it was further prayed to issue direction to the said Police Station to stay the investigation and not to file charge sheet till deciding of the present application. The Division Bench of Ravindra V. Ghuge and Rajesh S. Patil, JJ., allowed the application to the extent of Applicants 5 to 8, being maternal uncles and their wives, but rejected it to the extent of Applicants 1 to 4, stating that there were grave and serious allegations against them. The Court opined that Applicant 1’s relatives could not have had the knowledge of his condition of being unable to develop physical relations with the complainant, because such condition normally was known to the person himself, and such information does not travel beyond the home.<\/p>\n

In the present case, a FIR was registered with the Vijapur Naka Police Station, Solapur (City), which indicated that Applicants 5 to 8, who were maternal uncles and their wives, of Applicant 1, desired that the complainant should marry Applicant 1-the complainant’s husband. The complainant’s grievance was that Applicant 1 was unable to develop physical relations with her and suffered from a medical condition, which was known to his uncles and their wives.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that whether Applicant 1 was unable to develop physical relations and whether he had a deficiency by which he was unable to cohabit, was a condition which normally was known to the person himself, and such information does not travel beyond the home and sometimes, even the nearest relatives also do not know or notice.<\/p>\n

The Court stated that the complainant did not submit that she was compelled and coerced by Applicants 5 to 8 to get married to Applicant 1, but her contention was that they were keen that marriage should be solemnized between them. The Court noted that there were grave allegations against Applicants 1 to 4, complainant’s in-laws regarding the atrocities committed by them, which compelled the complainant to approach the Police Station. The Court also noted the complainant’s submission that though she resided in her marital home for about two years, there was no cohabitation between her and Applicant 1, and he avoided her and could not develop physical relations with her.<\/p>\n

The Court, after considering the allegations of alleged physical torture, harassment, demand for dowry and Applicant 1 being unable to develop physical relations, opined that Applicants 5 to 8 were only instrumental in introducing the proposal of Applicant 1 to the complainant and it could not be said that they had the knowledge of Applicant 1’s condition.<\/p>\n

The Court relied on Rajeev Kourav<\/span> v. Baisahab<\/span>, (2020) 3 SCC 317<\/a>; Kaptan Singh<\/span> v. State of Uttar Pradesh<\/span>, (2021) 9 SCC 35<\/a>; State of Odisha<\/span> v. Pratima Mohanty<\/span>, (2022) 16 SCC 703<\/a> and opined that the High Court could not indulge in a fact-finding exercise while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482<\/a>5<\/sup><\/a> of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’).<\/p>\n

The Court opined that this Court was not expected to assess whether any offence could be proved in the trial and whether there were any chances of the accused getting an acquittal. The Court stated that if an offence was made out in the allegations in the FIR, all other attending circumstances could be considered by the trial Court and if this Court finds that an offence made out against a particular accused would require a trial, this Court was not expected to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482<\/a> of CrPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court thus partly allowed the present application and quashed the FIR to the extent of Applicants 5 to 8. The Court, in relation to Applicants 1 to 4, opined that there were grave and serious allegations against them and the offence registered was triable and if proved, it was punishable in the light of Sections 498-A<\/a>, 417<\/a>, and 504<\/a> read with Section 34<\/a> of IPC<\/a>. Thus, the Court rejected the application to the extent of Applicants 1 to 4.<\/p>\n

[XYZ v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 51<\/a>, decided on 03-01-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Applicants:<\/span> V. R. Shinde, Advocate for the Applicants<\/p>\n

For the Respondents:<\/span> P. N. Dabholkar, APP for State; Vishwanath Patil a\/w. Nidhi Chauhan, Akshay Naidu, Advocates for Respondent 2.<\/p>\n

Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"penal<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n

1.<\/a> Corresponding Section 178(1)<\/a> of the Nyaya Sanhita, 2023<\/a> (‘BNS, 2023’)<\/p>\n

2.<\/a> Section 318(2)<\/a> of BNS, 2023<\/a><\/p>\n

3.<\/a> Sections 351(2)<\/a> and 351(3)<\/a> of BNS, 2023<\/a><\/p>\n

4.<\/a> Section 3(5)<\/a>of BNS, 2023<\/a><\/p>\n

5.<\/a> Corresponding Section 528<\/a> of the Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Court stated that Applicants 5 to 8, being maternal uncles and their wives, are only instrumental in introducing Applicant 1’a marriage proposal to the complainant and it cannot be said that they knew about his condition.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":314919,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2569,77404,71270,77406,77405,31299],"class_list":["post-338791","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-husbands-inability-to-cohabit","tag-justice-ravindra-v-ghuge","tag-justices-rajesh-s-patil","tag-section-1781-bns-2023","tag-section-498-a-ipc"],"yoast_head":"\n\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Bombay High Court quashed FIR against husband\u2019s relatives stating that they could not have known about his inability to cohabit as it\u2019s a condition known to him, does not travel beyond home.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court quashed FIR against husband\u2019s relatives stating that they could not have known about his inability to cohabit as it\u2019s a condition known to him, does not travel beyond home.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-01-10T06:30:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-01-16T05:31:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/\",\"name\":\"\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-01-10T06:30:58+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-01-16T05:31:20+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\"},\"description\":\"Bombay High Court quashed FIR against husband\u2019s relatives stating that they could not have known about his inability to cohabit as it\u2019s a condition known to him, does not travel beyond home.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Bombay High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\",\"name\":\"Simranjeet\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Simranjeet\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives | SCC Times","description":"Bombay High Court quashed FIR against husband\u2019s relatives stating that they could not have known about his inability to cohabit as it\u2019s a condition known to him, does not travel beyond home.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives","og_description":"Bombay High Court quashed FIR against husband\u2019s relatives stating that they could not have known about his inability to cohabit as it\u2019s a condition known to him, does not travel beyond home.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-01-10T06:30:58+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-01-16T05:31:20+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Simranjeet","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Simranjeet","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/","name":"\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2025-01-10T06:30:58+00:00","dateModified":"2025-01-16T05:31:20+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd"},"description":"Bombay High Court quashed FIR against husband\u2019s relatives stating that they could not have known about his inability to cohabit as it\u2019s a condition known to him, does not travel beyond home.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Bombay High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/10\/husbands-inability-to-cohabit-is-condition-known-to-him-bomhc-quashes-fir-against-husbands-relatives\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018Husband\u2019s inability to cohabit is a condition known to him and does not travel beyond home\u2019; Bombay HC quashes FIR against husband\u2019s relatives"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd","name":"Simranjeet","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Simranjeet"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":355619,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/05\/bom-hc-friend-not-relative-under-section-498a-ipc\/","url_meta":{"origin":338791,"position":0},"title":"Husband\u2019s friend not a \u2018relative\u2019 under Section 498-A IPC: Bombay High Court","author":"Editor","date":"August 5, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The husband\u2019s friend tried to convince him that if his demands are not fulfilled then he shall not cohabit with his wife and shall send her to her paternal home.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/blog-7-7.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/blog-7-7.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/blog-7-7.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/blog-7-7.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":221839,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/11\/07\/bom-hc-divorced-wife-who-continue-to-cohabit-with-the-husband-is-entitled-to-filed-proceedings-under-s-12-of-dv-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":338791,"position":1},"title":"Bom HC | Divorced wife, who continues to cohabit with the husband, is entitled to filed proceedings under S. 12 of DV Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 7, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0Mangesh S. Patil, J., dismissed a criminal revision application filed against the order of the trial court whereby the application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, filed by the divorced wife of the applicant-husband was allowed and he was directed to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":351099,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/20\/bom-hc-section-498a-ipc-wifes-tendency-to-implicate-husband-to-settle-personal-scores\/","url_meta":{"origin":338791,"position":2},"title":"\u201cIt\u2019s wife’s tendency to implicate husband and his family members to settle personal scores\u201d: Bombay HC Quashes Dowry Harassment FIR against In-Laws","author":"Editor","date":"June 20, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Only out of ulterior motive to settle personal score, wife makes generalized and sweeping accusation unsupported by concrete evidence. As a result, the family members of husband have to face agony of criminal trial, when no prima facie case is made out against them.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":258468,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/14\/woman-commits-suicide-due-to-alleged-illicit-relationship-of-husband\/","url_meta":{"origin":338791,"position":3},"title":"Woman commits suicide due to alleged illicit relationship of husband; mother registers case but seeks to withdraw stating she had lodged report under \u2018rage\u2019 | Bom HC Demystifies","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 14, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: Division Bench of M.S. Sonal and Pushpa V. Ganediwala, JJ.,\u00a0quashed the charges of abetment of suicide and other offences under IPC against the applicants, on finding that no purpose would be served in continuing criminal proceedings against them. In the present matter, applicants sought quashing of FIR\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":339382,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/20\/mere-statement-that-wife-cannot-cohabit-with-husband-unless-she-brings-amount-without-any-action-not-harassment-bhc\/","url_meta":{"origin":338791,"position":4},"title":"Mere statement that wife cannot cohabit with husband unless she brings amount without any action will not amount to harassment: Bombay HC quashes FIR","author":"Editor","date":"January 20, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt is in the wisdom of the Investigating officer to file charge-sheet against those accused against whom there is strong evidence. Unnecessary harassment and false implication should be avoided.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":289453,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/bombay-high-court-quashes-fir-filed-by-state-on-false-grounds-in-blatant-violation-law-legal-research-updates-awareness-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":338791,"position":5},"title":"S. 353 IPC not to be used as a tool to cover outright illegality; Bombay High Court quashes false FIR filed by State","author":"Arunima","date":"April 14, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court observed that the objective of Section 353 IPC is to prevent a public servant from not being obstructed while performing his lawful duties and same cannot be allowed to become a tool in hand, of unscrupulous persons to cover up outright illegality as done in the present\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-581.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/338791","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=338791"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/338791\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314919"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=338791"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=338791"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=338791"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}