Client Testimonials

"By far the best legal document drafting expert! I’ve been struggling with a false 498/406 and DV case from last 2 years and so far met 20+ Different lawyers from lower court to high court, but the major difference I see in Sahil is his intentions of making me out of this situation so that I can be a free man. Only a 30 min discussion with Sahil was an eye opener to me. Now I'm feeling more confident that such cases can also be defended and law can be moved from women-centric to men-centric. I have asked Sahil for a ‘bayan’ for my DV case which he, after analyzing 50+ documents, has made it in a lightning speed time of 24 hours. I would also say I was surprised that he didn’t forget to mention even a single nook of any statement that could be in my favor. I would highly recommend anyone for a free 30 min call that can give a new hopeful direction; without losing anything."

"Sahil is one of the best brains to help someone to fight these kinds of cases. His grasping power is awesome to understand your case quickly and provide a solution. Sahil knows very well which point he has to highlight in the draft so people like us get the clarity on our own case and get the best result in the court. His knowledge is admirable as he has a good grip on different IPCs and Cr.P.C from our law system. I worked with him on my 498a petition and feeling quite confident after working with him. I will recommend everyone to talk to Sahil once to get the best result from your case. Now he is my good friend too. Thanks Sahil."

"I got in connect with Sahil sir few months back to seek his guidance for 125 CrPC, DV, and 498A. I must say it's really helpful and Sahil sir had drafted a strong WS for me. It was under the sheer guidance of Sahil sir that I could tackle my mediation in a positive manner."

"I am very thankful to Apaizers Mens Rights in supporting and helping me in my case and saved my lakhs of rupees. Sir also motivates time to time, also advises how to maintain your health first which is NECESSARY in this critical condition. It's clear that no more people from our side help or motivate during this time of false cases. In this time, we require a good or best adviser. Really, Sir IS ALL IN ONE. I repeat that unnumbered thanks to Apaizers Men's Right for the best advice to false cases."

"I got my DV interim maintenance appeal prepared from Apaizers Mens Rights for the session court. It is so nicely drafted and prepared with relevant case reference due to which the session court dismissed the interim maintenance order passed by the lower court. Then in my DV case, the opposite party filed for execution petition for the arrears of the maintenance amount 1.2 lakhs, the objections drafted by Sahil Sir with the relevant facts and case reference got accepted by the court and the court dismissed the OP execution petition."

498A Quash Judgement after chargesheet 08.10.2021 - Over Implicated Allegations against Sister-in-law, her husband and other distant relatives are absurd and general. FIR Quashed.

 498A Quash Judgement after chargesheet 08.10.2021 - Over Implicated Allegations against Sister-in-law, her husband and other distant relatives are absurd and general. FIR Quashed.

498a quash judgement 08.01.2021
498A Quash Judgement after chargesheet 08.10.2021


498a Quash Judgement after chargesheet 08.10.2021 - In this article, the high court held that the allegation against the Sister-n-law, her husband, and distant relatives are general in nature. Further the high court held that The incident that was quoted is absurd in nature. So the high court in view of the above grounds quashed the FIR.


Case brief- 498A Quash Judgement after chargesheet 08.10.2021

Petitioners nos.4 to 7 are the accused in the FIR registered with Police Station, District Ahmednagar for the offenses punishable under sections 498A, 406, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the IPC. In the case charge sheet is submitted to the court and the case is registered which is pending before the Magistrate, District Ahmednagar. This application is for quashing the charge sheet and the FIR against, the applicant nos.4 to 7.

_______________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement after chargesheet 08.10.2021

Advocate for the applicants submits that, though names of the petitioners nos.4 to 7 are mentioned in the FIR, allegations are absurd in nature. Advocate submits that complainant has made allegations against them with an ulterior motive of wreaking vengeance.

The advocate submits that petitioner no.4 is a married sister-in-law residing with her husband petitioner no.5. Petitioner nos.6 and 7 are the maternal uncles, District Aurangabad. The advocate submits that it is a case of over implication.

Advocate for complainant submits that, not only names of the petitioners are mentioned in the FIR, however, a specific role has been attributed to each of them by quoting the specific incident.

Advocate submits that petitioner has also abused complainant and threatened her in the event if the demand made by co-accused is not fulfilled. Further, they have also instigated co-accused persons to subject her to cruelty till the demand of Rs.10 Lakh is fulfilled.


Referred Cases-498A Quash Judgement after chargesheet 08.10.2021

  1.  Geeta Mehrotra and others v. State of U.P.

  2.  Neelu Chopra and others vs. Bharti

  3. Taramani Parakh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others

__________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________


Opinion of Court- 498A Quash Judgement after chargesheet 08.10.2021

So far as petitioner no.4 is concerned, she is a married sister-in-law and even her husband applicant no.5 is also implicated as accused in connection with the present crime. petitioner nos.6 and 7 are the maternal uncles. All the applicants are residing in different places. This is a clear example of over implication.

In case Geeta Mehrotra and others v. State of U.P. and others, AIR 2013 SC 181, the Supreme Court held that all the courts are expected to adopt a deep approach in matters of quashing specifically in cases of matrimonial dispute whether the FIR in allegations discloses commission of an offense by the distant relatives of the main accused or the  FIR prima facie discloses a case of over-implication by involving the all family members of the accused in the complainant, who is out to settle her ego arising out of the small problem or skirmish of domestic disputes while settling down in her new matrimonial house.

Ongoing through the complaint, it cannot be held that even if the allegations are taken as proved no prima facie case is made out. The question of whether the petitioners have in fact been harassed and treated with cruelty is a matter of trial but at this stage, it cannot be said that no case is made out. Thus, quashing proceedings before the trial is not right.

In the instant case, as far as the petitioners before us are concerned, the allegations against them are absurd and do not make out any case.

From a reading of the complaint and even allegations as against them are taken as proved, no case is made out. In the above-cited case of Taramani, the Supreme Court has observed that in matrimonial cases, the Courts have to be cautious when the omnibus allegations are made specifically against distant relatives, who have no interference in the life of the couple.

So far as the petitioners before the court are concerned, allegations are general in nature. Though one incident is quoted, however, the allegations are absurd in nature.

In view of the above and in terms of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court, the high court quashed the FIR and Chargesheet.

________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________

Conclusion: 498A Quash Judgement after chargesheet 08.10.2021

 In this article, the high court held that the allegation against the Sister-n-law, her husband, and distant relatives are general in nature. The content of the complaint and even allegations against the petitioners are taken as proof, so no case is made out. In the case of Taramani, the Supreme Court has observed that in matrimonial cases, the Courts have to be cautious when the general allegations are made specifically against distant relatives, who have no interference in the life of the couple. Hence the high court on the above grounds quashed the FIR.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram
Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

WhatsApp




    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment