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 10.11.2021 – Karnataka High Court held that allegations made against mother-in-law & sister-in-law are general & sweeping. FIR Quashed

498A Quash Judgement 10.11.2021 – Karnataka High Court held that allegations made against mother-in-law & sister-in-law are general & sweeping. FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 10.11.2021 – Allegations made against mother-in-law & sister-in-law are general & sweeping. FIR Quashed
498A Quash Judgement 10.11.2021

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

Mrs. Prabhavati Gujar vs State Of Karnataka on 10.11.2021

498A Quash Judgement 10.11.2021 – In this article, the Karnataka High court has held that the allegations made against the mother-in-law & unmarried sister-in-law who have been residing separately are boundless & general in nature, further it was held by the Karnataka High court that it is only as a passing reference as there is no mention of any act that has alleged to have been committed by the petitioners both in the complaint & the FIR. Hence, the Karnataka High court held that it would amount to an abuse of the process of law and quashed the FIR.

Case Brief - 498A Quash Judgement 10.11.2021

On 24-12-2004 the marriage of the husband & wife was solemnized 24.12.2004 and thereafter they shifted to Texas, USA. The wife and her husband lived in the USA between 2004-2011. In November 2011, the wife and her husband decided to move back to India. After their return, the husband of the mother-in-law died on 5-09-2014. In November 2014 both the wife and her husband shifted to Bangalore and began to reside there.

It is further contended that in April 2018, the husband came back to Mumbai from Bangalore to take care of his mother who wasn’t well & requested the wife to shift back to Mumbai as well where they all will live together. This led to the filing of a domestic violence petition by the wife which is pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate Traffic court, Bangalore seeking maintenance against the husband.

After filing the petition for maintenance, the wife lodged a complaint against the petitioners and her husband, and it was registered by the police as a Non-Cognizable Report. After this complaint was turned down by the police, the wife then registered another complaint alleging offences under Sections 498A r/w Section 34 of the IPC against the petitioners and her husband.

The first complaint was registered on 21.09.2018 and in this complaint a NCR was issued by the police. After a month on 24.10.2018, a second complaint was filed by the wife alleging certain other facts that were not mentioned in the first complaint which led to the registration of FIR against the petitioners and the husband of the wife as the offence stated in the second FIR was one punishable under Section 498A of the IPC.


Read Latest Article- 498A quash judgement by supreme court- The bald allegations against married sister-in-law do not attract section 498A. FIR Quashed

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C


Arguments – 498A Quash Judgement 10.11.2021

Advocate of petitioners submitted that the wife and the husband have never resided with the petitioners. For 7 years of their matrimonial life, they were living in the USA and in the month of November 2011, when the husband along with his wife came back to India they resided with the family for a certain period of time & later moved back to Bangalore. There was no occasion for the petitioners who are mother-in-law and unmarried sister-in-law to have engaged in any act which would attract the provisions of Section 498A IPC.

The petitioners have in fact taken care of the wife whenever she has stayed with them for whatever period and only because there were problems between the husband and the wife, the petitioners are also dragged into the frame.

Advocate also submitted that the first complaint lodged resulted in an NCR and only the second complaint is lodged for further offences. He submits that it is a clear case in which Court has to interfere and quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

On the other side, the Advocate of the wife submitted that the petitioners have indulged in various acts of harassment against the wife as could be noticed from the complaint itself, as the wife was for a short period had stayed with the petitioners and it is at that point of time, the petitioners have caused mental harassment to the wife.

He further contends that there is a bag of disputed questions of fact as to how the wife has been treated by the petitioners pushing her to the wall and the mental harassment caused by the petitioners. This would come under the provisions of Section498A IPC. 

This Court at this stage should not quash the proceeding as it is a matter of trial and the Court would not interfere under Section 482A of the Cr.P.C. of investigation as it is the emphatic submission of the learned Senior Counsel.

Referred Cases - 498A Quash Judgement 10.11.2021

1. GeetaMehrotra V. State of Uttar Pradesh

2. PreetiGupta And Anr. V. State of Jharkhand

3. Rashmi Chopra And Ors. V. State of Uttar Pradesh

4. T.S.K Ashwin Kumar V. State of Telangana

5. State of Haryana V. Bhajan Lal

6. Manoj Mahavir Prasad Khaitan V. Ram Gopal Poddar



Court Opinion - 498A Quash Judgement 10.11.2021

In this case, the allegations made against the mother-in-law & unmarried sister-in-law is only a passing reference as the FIR only brings out the names of the petitioners & that they have indicated that the wife has to live separately with the husband. Except for this, no other act of cruelty is stated to have been committed by the petitioners.

It is not disputable that both the petitioners are not staying with the wife and the husband. And it is a well-settled principle laid down in cases too numerous to mention, that if the FIR did not disclose the commission of an offence, the court is of the point in quashing the proceedings & preventing the abuse of the process of law.

It seems that the High Court has overlooked all the pleas that were questioned and dismissed the petition on the sole ground of territorial jurisdiction giving liberty to the appellants to approach the trial court.


Buy "Guide to Fight Maintenance Under section 125 Cr.P.C


Conclusion - 498A Quash Judgement 10.11.2021

In this article the Karnataka High court held that the allegations made against the mother-in-law & unmarried sister-in-law are boundless & general in nature. Even if taken at par they wouldn’t attract the provisions of Section 498A IPC. Hence, the FIR was quashed by the High court.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights


    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment