AFSANABEN MAHMADBHAI BHADARKA vs STATE OF GUJARAT

R/CR.MA/18805/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 18805 of 2020

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
AFSANABEN MAHMADBHAI BHADARKA & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR CHINTAN S POPAT(5004) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
A M CHAUHAN(3439) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. ROHAN SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

Date : 25/06/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard, learned advocate Mr. Chintan S. Popat for the
applicants. When the matter is called out, neither complainant nor
learned advocate Mr. A. M. Chauhan for the complainant remained
present, hence, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
2. By way of the present application filed under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants have prayed
for quashing and setting aside FIR being C.R. No.11186010200024
of 2020 registered with the Mahila Police Station, Gir Somnath
District, for the offences punishable under Sections 354(1)(i),
Page 1 of 6
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jun 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jun 25 19:36:03 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/18805/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
498(a), 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. The case of the complainant as per FIR in nutshell is to the
effect that the complainant got married with accused No.6 on
30.06.2019, after some time of marriage, accused No.6, complainant
and accused No.1 – brother-in-law of the complainant went to
Rajkot and residing together at Rajkot as all are doing service there.
Thereafter, upon the instigation to accused No.6 by present
applicants and other person, complainant has been subjected to
harassment. And at Rajkot, original accused No.1 has having bad
intention on complainant. Upon complaint made to her husband and
applicants herein about the same, they did not pay any attention.
Further, on one occasion complainant herein was beaten by accused
No.6. Even, she made complaint to applicants, they have also
harassed her and demanded dowry. With these short of allegation,
complaint came to be filed against in total six accused persons,
wherein applicants herein are shown as accused Nos.2 to 5.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Chintan S. Popat for the applicants
would submit that the present applicants are residents of village
Chachar, Taluka: Kodinar, District: Gir Somnath, and even as per
the averments in the FIR, the complainant lived along with original
accused No. 1 and accused No. 6, and the main allegations are
against the husband and the brother-in-law, namely accused No. 6
and No. 1, respectively, against whom criminal case No. 263 of 2021
has culminated into acquittal by judgment dated 19.04.2025, passed
Page 2 of 6
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jun 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jun 25 19:36:03 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/18805/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
nd
by the 2 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gir Somnath,
wherein also the complainant in her cross-examination has admitted
that she had lodged the complaint while she was upset, and that none
of the persons named in the FIR have ever inflicted any mental or
physical cruelty, and there was only a small quarrel between
husband and wife. Thus, learned advocate for the applicants would
submit that the present application be allowed, more particularly, the
allegations against original accused Nos.2 to 5 – applicants herein
are vague, omnibus in nature and without any specific role attributed
to any one of them.
5. Per contra , learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Rohan
Shah opposed the application and would submit that merely because
the husband and the brother-in-law have been acquitted in criminal
case No. 263 of 2021 by the competent court vide judgment and
order dated 19.04.2025, it cannot be said that the applicants have
also committed no crime as alleged in the FIR, since it would be a
matter of evidence, to be decided when the trial is conducted.
Learned APP would further submit that the allegations prima facie
discloses offense as alleged in the FIR, and as thus, argued to reject
the present application.
6. Heard, learned advocate for the applicants and leaned APP for
the State. The question that arises for consideration is whether the
allegations contained in the impugned FIR warrant quashing of the
same having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present
Page 3 of 6
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jun 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jun 25 19:36:03 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/18805/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
case. The factum of acquittal of husband and brother-in-law, original
accused No. 6 and No. 1, is not in dispute. The factum of wife
having not supported the case of the prosecution while she was
cross-examined is also not in dispute. Be that as it may, the fact
remains that even prima facie on the plain reading of the FIR, the
allegations qua applicants herein, i.e. original accused number 2 to 5,
are vague, omnibus and without having any specific role attributed
to anyone.
7. At the outset, it is required to be noted that there is no specific
incident, date or period mentioned in the FIR as regards the alleged
physical assault by the applicants herein – accused Nos.2 to 5. Even
qua the other allegations leveled against the applicants are general,
vague and omnibus in nature and are bereft of any material
particulars to substantiate the same. No specific details or particular
incidents of harassment, cruelty or assault have been narrated by the
complainant.
8. In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dara
Lakshmi Narayan v. State of Telangana (2024) SCC OnLine SC
3682 has observed that generalized and sweeping accusations
unsupported by concrete material or particularized allegations cannot
form the basis of a criminal prosecution. The Hon'ble Supreme
Court has further observed that it is a well-recognized fact, borne out
of judicial experience, that there is often a tendency to implicate all
the members of the husband's family when matrimonial disputes
Page 4 of 6
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jun 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jun 25 19:36:03 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/18805/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
arise out of domestic discord.
9. Thus, it transpires from the FIR that the complainant has roped
in all the family members by making omnibus allegations without
mentioning any specific incident, date or overt act attributable to any
of them with regard to the alleged cruelty.
10. Having regard to the aforesaid facts, it appears that no specific
and distinct allegations have been made against any of the present
applicants. None of the applicants has been attributed any specific
role in furtherance of the alleged offences. The general allegations
made in the FIR fail to ascertain the role played by each accused
and, therefore, do not satisfy the requirements necessary for
continuation of criminal proceedings against them.
11. At the highest, the allegations may be said to arise out of the
ordinary wear and tear of matrimonial life and minor skirmishes
between the parties. Inasmuch as original accused No.6 – husband
and original accused No.1 – brother-in-law are concerned, they are
acquitted by the competent court.
12. Thus, upon consideration of the relevant facts and
circumstances of the case and in the absence of any specific role
attributed to the present applicants, this Court is of the view that it
would be unjust to compel them to undergo the rigours of a criminal
Page 5 of 6
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jun 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jun 25 19:36:03 IST 2026

R/CR.MA/18805/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 25/06/2026
trial solely on the basis of vague, general and omnibus allegations.
Permitting the proceedings to continue against the present applicants
would amount to abuse of the process of law. Even otherwise, such
prosecution is likely to culminate in acquittal after subjecting the
applicants to unnecessary hardship and harassment.
13. Resultantly, the present application succeeds and is hereby
allowed. FIR being C.R. No.11186010200024 of 2020 registered
with the Mahila Police Station, Gir Somnath District, and all
consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua the applicants –
original accused Nos.2 to 5, are hereby quashed and set aside.
14. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is
permitted.
(P. M. RAVAL, J)
NITIN MAKWANA
Page 6 of 6
Uploaded by NITIN INDRAVADANMAKWANA(HCW0110) on Thu Jun 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Jun 25 19:36:03 IST 2026