Woman & 2 Daughters Booked For Bid To Attack Family Court Judge: Nashik Sessions Court Denies Them Anticipatory Bail

MAHARASHTRA: A Nashik Sessions Court has rejected the anticipatory bail plea of a woman, her mother and her sister, who allegedly created chaos inside the Nashik Family Court, shouted at a judicial officer, abused advocates and attempted to attack the judge during court proceedings.

Additional Sessions Judge, in an order dated October 28, 2026, refused to grant anticipatory bail to all three women, observing that the allegations were serious and custodial interrogation was necessary.

The incident took place on September 4, 2024, during an ongoing matrimonial dispute between a husband and wife before the Nashik Family Court.

Read Also:- Matrimonial Dispute | Last-Minute Shifting Of Trial At Final Stage Is Highly Unjustified And Improper: Kerala HC Rejects Transfer Bid By Wife

According to the FIR reproduced in the bail order, the wife appeared in court with her mother and sister. While the judicial officer heard another case, the three women allegedly created a ruckus in the courtroom, demanding an immediate change to their hearing date.

They reportedly shouted,

"We do not want this date, change the date right now, right now!"

The judicial officer asked them to submit their grievance in writing, stating, "What do you have to say? Give it in writing; I will pass the order accordingly.

However, the women allegedly refused to listen and continued shouting,

"Change the date right now!"

Their alleged misconduct disrupted the proceedings so seriously that the judicial officer was forced to leave the courtroom and retire to her private chamber, bringing the proceedings to a halt.

Instead of leaving, the three women allegedly followed the judge towards her private chamber and shouted,

"Call the Presiding Officer back to the dais right now; we will not leave this place until you do!"

The women also allegedly accused the judge and advocates of accepting bribes and treating the wife unfairly in the matrimonial proceedings.

According to the FIR, the wife and her sister then allegedly banged heavily on the judicial officer's chamber door. The sister allegedly rushed towards the chamber with the intention of assaulting the judge from behind, but advocates and court staff intervened and restrained her.

The confrontation reportedly escalated further when the women allegedly abused the advocates, shouting, "All you fucking lawyers!"

After the incident, Nashik Road Police registered a criminal case against the three women under Sections 132, 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging obstruction of a public servant, criminal intimidation, intentional insult and common intention.

Facing the possibility of arrest, the wife, her mother and sister approached the Sessions Court seeking anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Their counsel claimed that the women were innocent, falsely implicated and willing to cooperate with the investigation. The defence argued that the allegations were exaggerated and custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

However, the prosecution strongly opposed their bail application, arguing that the allegations were serious, the investigation was ongoing, and granting protection from arrest could risk witness intimidation and evidence tampering.

After examining the FIR and investigation papers, the Court found that the available material prima facie indicated the three women's involvement in the alleged offences.

Read Also:- Salary Of Husband Is Personal Information: Rajasthan High Court Rejects Wife’s RTI Plea in Matrimonial Dispute

The Court observed that custodial interrogation was necessary to properly investigate the incident, verify the allegations, and determine the roles of those involved.

Referring to the Supreme Court judgments in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar and State represented by the CBI v. Anil Sharma, the Court emphasised that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy and cannot be granted as a matter of routine.

The Court held that the seriousness of the allegations and the need for a fair investigation did not justify granting pre-arrest protection.

Consequently, on October 28, 2026, the Nashik Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail applications of the wife, her mother, and her sister, allowing the investigation to proceed without anticipatory bail protection.

EXPLANATORY TABLE OF LAWS AND SECTIONS

CASE DETAILS

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Wife & Family Face Criminal Charges: A wife, her mother and sister allegedly turned a matrimonial hearing into courtroom chaos.
• Judge Targeted Over Hearing Date: Three women allegedly abused lawyers, disrupted proceedings and attempted to attack a Family Court judge.
• No Anticipatory Bail For Three Women: Nashik Sessions Court refused to grant them protection from arrest.
• Serious Allegations, No Automatic Protection: Court found prima facie involvement and held custodial interrogation necessary.
• Women Are Not Above The Law: Matrimonial disputes are no licence to threaten judges or obstruct justice. Equal rights demand equal accountability.