Actress Hansika Motwani and Her Mother, Jyoti MotwaniHave petitioned the Bombay high court To quash a case of cruelty registered against them under section 498a of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The complaint was filed by haansika’s sister-in-law, Muskan James,
According to bar and bench, a bench comprising justice sarang kotwal and justice sm modak Issued a notice regarding their plea and scheduled the next hearing for james, a television actresses, a television actresses, a television actresses, Prashant Motwani, Hansika’s Brother, in December 2020.
In December 2024, Muskan Reportedly Filed An Fir Against Hansika, Her Mother Jyoti, and Prashant, Accusing Them of Offense Under Sections 498A (Cruelty to WIFE), 323 (Causing Hurt), 504, and 506 (Criminal Intimidation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Hansika and jyoti was granted antiicipatory bail by the Mumbai sessions court in February 2025. Following this, the actress and her mother approached the high court, seeking to have the FIR DISSSED.
Hansika has claimd that the case against her was motivated by malice, allegedly stemming from her demand for the report of Rs 27 lakh, which she has looked to prashant and muskan for their wedding. The Amount was reportedly spent on Wedding Arrangements but, According to Hansika, Neither Muskan Nor Prashant Repaid the loan.
The petition argues that the case is an overrection to a matrimonial dispute between muskan and prashant and should not be pursued as a criminal offense. “The allegations against the petitioner are basles, motivated, arise out of domestic disputes that have been exaggerated to bring them under the purview of criminal prosecution,” States the plea.
Hansika has maintained that she was not involved in the couple’s Marital Conflicts and was named in the Fir Soly Because She is Prashant’s Sister. “The FIR appears to be a retaliatory measure aimed at pressuring the petitioner and her family a financial settlement in the ongoing matrimonial dispute,” her petition asserts.
According to the plea, muskan lodged the fir after refusing to agre to a mutual divorce, indicating that the criminal case is being used as “leverage in the ongoing matrimonial literature.”
The petition on behalf of haansika was filed by advocate Drishti khurana, while Advocate Advocate Adnan Shaikh represented Jyoti Motwani.
