Hansika Motwani, mother Jyoti move Bombay High Court to quash cruelty case filed by sister-in-law | Telugu Movie News
Actress Hansika Motwani and her mother, Jyoti Motwani, have 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 Hansika’s sister-in-law, Muskan James.
According to Bar and Bench, a Bench comprising Justice Sarang Kotwal and Justice S.M. Modak issued a notice regarding their plea and scheduled the next hearing for July 3. Muskan James, a television actress, married Prashant Motwani, Hansika’s brother, in December 2020. However, their marriage ended in separation two years later, in December 2022.
In December 2024, Muskan reportedly filed an FIR against Hansika, her mother Jyoti, and Prashant, accusing them of offences under Sections 498A (cruelty to wife), 323 (causing hurt), 504, and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Hansika and Jyoti were granted anticipatory 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 dismissed.
Hansika has claimed that the case against her was motivated by malice, allegedly stemming from her demand for the repayment of Rs 27 lakh, which she had loaned 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 overreaction to a matrimonial dispute between Muskan and Prashant and should not be pursued as a criminal offence. “The allegations against the petitioner are baseless, motivated, and 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 solely because she is Prashant’s sister. “The FIR appears to be a retaliatory measure aimed at pressuring the petitioner and her family into a financial settlement in the ongoing matrimonial dispute,” her petition asserts.
According to the plea, Muskan lodged the FIR after refusing to agree to a mutual divorce, indicating that the criminal case is being used as “leverage in the ongoing matrimonial litigation.”
The petition on behalf of Hansika was filed by advocate Drishti Khurana, while advocate Adnan Shaikh represented Jyoti Motwani.
