Avtar Dwivedi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86285
1 MCRC-42998-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR

BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIMANSHU JOSHI
th
ON THE 27 OF OCTOBER, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 42998 of 2023
CNR No.: MPHC010568942023
AVTAR DWIVEDI AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANR
Appearance:
Shri Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate for the petitioner.
Smt. Nalini Gurung - P.L. for the respondent/State.
Ms. Vidhi Singh, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by the
impugned FIR bearing Crime No.61/2023, registered at Police Station Tala,
District Satna (M.P.) for punishable of offence under Section 498-A, 294,
323, 506/34 of IPC and charge sheet dated 10.04.2023 pending before the
JFMC, Amarpatan.
2. As per prosecution story, the husband of the complainant (Smt.
Shakti Dwivedi) tragically died in an accident on 16/01/2022, following
which she went to her parental home, and upon subsequently returning to her
in-laws' house, she alleged that the parents-in-law, the brother of the
deceased, and the brother's wife harassed her and demanded dowry, causing
her to return to her parental home to inform her mother and sister;
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 04-11-2026
14:36:33

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86285
2 MCRC-42998-2023
consequently, the police of Police Station Tala, District Satna (M.P.)

registered Crime No. 61/2023 on 10/03/2023 for offences under Sections
498-A, 294, 323, and 506/34 of the I.P.C., and after investigation, filed a
charge sheet on 10/04/2023 before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First
Class, District Satna, even though a perusal of the entire charge sheet reveals
that the alleged offences are not made out against the applicant, making the
proceedings an apparent abuse of the process of law and necessitating this
petition for quashing the impugned FIR dated 10/03/2023 in relation to the
charge sheet dated 10/04/2023.
3 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that It is respectfully
submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the criminal proceedings arising
from FIR Crime No. 61/2023 dated 10/03/2023 registered at Police Station
Tala, District Satna, and the subsequent charge sheet dated 10/04/2023 under
Sections 498-A, 294, 323, 506/34 of the I.P.C., deserve to be quashed as they
are vague, omnibus, and an absolute abuse of the process of law. Following
the tragic demise of the complainant's husband on 16/01/2022, she
voluntarily shifted to her parental house and resided separately, only to file a
belated, afterthought complaint over a year later on 10/03/2023 without any
specific overt acts, dates, or concrete evidence attributed to the petitioner.
The allegations of dowry demand and cruelty are falsified by the petitioner's
genuinely benevolent conduct, including financial and educational support
and the opening of an LIC policy (No. 368194710) for the complainant's
security, reflecting a previously cordial relationship. As held by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Geeta Mehrotra v. State of U.P. reported in 2012(10) SCC
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 04-11-2026
14:36:33

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86285
3 MCRC-42998-2023
741 and Neelu Chopra v. Bharti, reported in 2009(10) SCC 184 casual

references and blanket roping of family members in matrimonial disputes
cannot sustain criminal prosecution, and since the uncontroverted allegations
fail to make out a prima facie case, the matter squarely satisfies the
parameters for quashing laid down in State of Haryana v. Bhajan
Lal reported in 1992 SCC(Cri) 426, warranting the intervention of this
Hon'ble Court to secure the ends of justice.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State as well as counsel for
respondent No.2 submits that instant petition seeking the quashing of FIR
Crime No. 61/2023 dated 10/03/2023 and the consequential charge sheet
dated 10/04/2023 under Sections 498-A, 294, 323, 506/34 of the I.P.C.,
registered at Police Station Tala, District Satna, is devoid of any merit and
deserves to be dismissed at the threshold. At the stage of taking cognizance
and considering a petition for quashing under Section 482 of the CrPC /
Section 528 of the BNSS, the High Court does not act as a trial court to sift
through evidence or weigh its sufficiency, but must take the allegations in
the FIR and charge sheet at their face value. The charge sheet discloses
specific and direct allegations of mental and physical harassment, cruelty,
and dowry demands committed by the in-laws and relatives of the deceased
husband upon the complainant's return to the matrimonial home following
her husband's tragic death on 16/01/2022. The mere fact that the complainant
resided separately for a period or that a delay occurred in lodging the FIR
cannot be used to prematurely throttle a genuine criminal prosecution,
especially in matrimonial offenses where victims often endure abuse in
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 04-11-2026
14:36:33

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86285
4 MCRC-42998-2023
silence in the hope of reconciliation before being driven out. The defense

raised by the petitioner regarding a cordial relationship, benevolent acts, or
an LIC policy are matters of defense and disputed questions of fact that can
only be tested and evaluated during a full-fledged trial through cross-
examination, rather than being adjudicated summarily under writ or inherent
jurisdiction. As established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of
judgments including Bhajan Lal (supra), where a prima facie cognizable
offence is clearly disclosed from the record and the investigation has
culminated in a charge sheet after due verification, the inherent powers of the
court to quash proceedings should be exercised sparingly and with utmost
circumspection, making the continuation of the present trial essential to
secure the ends of justice and protect the rights of a vulnerable survivor.
Counsel for the respondent No.2. further submitted that respondent No.2 was
compelled to leave the matrimonial home due to continuous torture and that
the petitioner attempt to deprive her and her child of their lawful rights.
Reliance has been placed upon the complaint under the Protection of Women
from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (Annexure R-1) and the statement of the
father-in-law in maintenance proceeding under section 125 of CrPC
(Annexure R-2). It is contended that the charges have already been framed
and the trial is at an advanced stage, therefore no ground for interference is
made out.
5. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. The question which arises for consideration is whether the
allegations contained in the FIR and the material collected during
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 04-11-2026
14:36:33

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86285
5 MCRC-42998-2023
investigation disclose the commission of the alleged offences against each of

the petitioners or whether the proceedings, insofar as certain petitioners are
concerned, amount to an abuse of the process of law.
7. The inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the
CrPC is intended to prevent abuse of the process of any Court and to secure
the ends of justice. Though such power is required to be exercised sparingly
and with circumspection, the Court is not precluded from examining whether
the uncontroverted allegations, taken at their face value, disclose the
essential ingredients of the offences alleged against the accused.
8. In the case of Bhajan Lal (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
illustrated the categories of cases in which the inherent powers may be
exercised for quashing criminal proceedings, particularly where the
allegations made in the FIR, even if taken in their entirety at face value, do
not prima facie constitute any offence against the accused.
9. Further, in Geeta Mehrotra (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
cautioned against the tendency of implicating all the family members of the
husband in matrimonial disputes by making general and omnibus allegations
without attributing any specific role to them. Similarly, in Neelu Chopra
(supra), it has been observed that the complaint must disclose the specific
role and allegations against the accused persons and that mere reproduction
of the statutory language or general allegations would not, by itself, be
sufficient to sustain criminal prosecution.
10. In the present case, upon a careful examination of the FIR, the
statements recorded during investigation and the material accompanying the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 04-11-2026
14:36:33

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86285
6 MCRC-42998-2023
charge-sheet, this Court finds that the allegations against petitioner No. 2,

Ravindra Dwivedi and No.3, Smt. Sudha Dwivedi, stand on a different
footing from those levelled against the remaining petitioners. Specific
allegations of harassment and demand of dowry have been attributed to
petitioner No. 2 and 3. The allegations against them, therefore, cannot be
treated as merely general or omnibus in nature at this stage. Whether such
allegations are ultimately established is a matter to be considered by the trial
Court upon appreciation of the evidence. This Court, at this stage, would not
be justified in conducting a mini-trial or examining the veracity of the
allegations against them.
11. However, insofar as the remaining petitioners are concerned, a
perusal of the FIR and the statements collected during investigation reveals
that the allegations are substantially general and omnibus in nature. No
specific overt act or distinct role has been attributed to them which would
prima facie constitute the offences alleged. The allegations, in substance,
appear to be directed against the family members collectively, without
disclosing the particular conduct of each of the said petitioners constituting
cruelty, physical assault, criminal intimidation or any other offence alleged
in the FIR.
12. Merely because the petitioners are related to the deceased husband
of respondent No.2, they cannot be subjected to criminal prosecution in the
absence of specific allegations disclosing their individual involvement in the
alleged offences. The criminal law cannot be permitted to operate merely on
the basis of relationship or a general allegation of harassment against the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 04-11-2026
14:36:33

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86285
7 MCRC-42998-2023
entire family. The principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Geeta Mehrotra (supra) and Neelu Chopra (supra) squarely applies to the
case of the remaining petitioners.
13. The contention raised by learned counsel for respondent No.2 with
regard to the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act and the statement
made in the maintenance proceedings has also been considered. However,
the existence of proceedings under other enactments or the allegations made
therein cannot, by itself, dispense with the requirement that the material in
the present criminal proceedings must disclose the essential ingredients of
the offences alleged against each accused. The question is whether the
present FIR and the material collected during investigation disclose a prima
facie case against the respective petitioners. For the reasons already
indicated, such material is insufficient to sustain the prosecution against the
petitioners other than petitioner No. 2 and 3.
14. The fact that the charges have already been framed or that the trial
has progressed to an advanced stage would not, by itself, operate as an
absolute bar to the exercise of inherent jurisdiction where the continuation of
the proceedings would otherwise amount to an abuse of the process of law.
The Court is required to examine the nature of allegations and the material
available against each accused independently.
15. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the considered
opinion that the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners,
except petitioner No. 2, Ravindra Dwivedi and No. 3, Smt. Sudha Dwivedi,
would amount to an abuse of the process of law and would not serve the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 04-11-2026
14:36:33

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:86285
8 MCRC-42998-2023
ends of justice. However, no case for quashing the criminal proceedings

against petitioner No.2 and 3 is made out at this stage.
16. Consequently, the petition is allowed in part. The FIR bearing
Crime No.61/2023 registered at Police Station Tala, District Satna (M.P.), for
the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 294, 323 and 506/34 of the
IPC, and the consequential charge-sheet dated 10.04.2023, as well as all
subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed insofar as the
petitioners other than petitioner No.2, Ravindra Dwivedi and No. 3, Smt.
Sudha Dwivedi, are concerned.
17. The petition, insofar as petitioner No.2, Ravindra Dwivedi and No.
3, Smt. Sudha Dwivedi, is concerned, is hereby dismissed. The criminal
proceedings against them shall continue in accordance with law, without
being influenced by any observation made herein, which is confined only to
the consideration of the present petition.
18. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the
merits of the allegations against petitioner No. 2 and 3, and the learned trial
Court shall proceed independently and decide the matter on the basis of the
evidence available on record.
19. Petition stands partly allowed and disposed of accordingly.
(HIMANSHU JOSHI)
JUDGE
Jasleen

Signature Not Verified
Signed by: JASLEEN SINGH
SALUJA
Signing time: 04-11-2026
14:36:33