498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019- General Allegation against the In-laws who are living separately and has no scope under Section 498A, FIR Quashed
498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019- In this article, Madras High Court held that as far as the brother and sister-in-law, a husband of sister-in-law and Uncle-in-law are concerned, the court is of the view that the allegations are rather general in nature and has no scope under Section 498A. The sister-in-law and the husband of the sister-in-law live in her own separate matrimonial home, and there is no justification for implicating the Brother and Uncle-in-law. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the In-laws are hereby quashed.
Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019
According to the facts mentioned in the F.I.R. filed by the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 09.09.2011 and after the marriage, the wife started to reside with her husband at her matrimonial home.
It is stated that a child was born through wedlock between the wife and her husband.
It is also stated that after the marriage, the husband and his family members started harassing the wife for bringing less dowry.
Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019
It is further stated that the marital relationship between the wife and her husband came under strain and the wife was tortured, harassed, and beaten by her husband and In-laws.
Upon this, the wife filed an F.I.R. before the Women Police Station, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District for the offenses under Sections 498A, 506(i), 403, and 406 of IPC read with Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against her Husband, Parents-in-law, Brother and Sister-in-law, husband of sister-in-law and Uncle-in-law.
The investigation was conducted, and the final report was submitted by the Police against the husband and In-laws.
_________________________________________________
Read Latest Article- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 27.09.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court-No Specific Allegation made against Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.
Arguments- 498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019
The advocate appearing on behalf of the Husband and the In-laws submitted that the Husband and Parents-in-law of the wife will face the trial and establish their innocence before the court.
It is also submitted that the general and vague allegations have been made against the Brother-in-law, Sister-in-law, Husband of Sister-in-law, and Uncle-in-law, and no prima facie case has been made against them.
It is also stated that the sister-in-law is married, and the sister-in-law lives with her husband at her matrimonial home, therefore the allegations against the sister-in-law and the husband of the sister-in-law are false. And there is no justification for implicating the Uncle-in-law of the wife.
Arguments- 498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019
Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of F.I.R. and Criminal Proceedings against the Brother-in-law, Sister-in-law, husband of sister-in-law, and Uncle-in-law filed by the wife.
On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife stated that there are allegations against the husband and all the In-laws of the wife.
Therefore, it was prayed to reject the petition of the In-laws and there is no question of quashing the F.I.R. filed by the wife.
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________
Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019
- State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019
The Hon’ble Supreme Court has decided in the above-mentioned case that if the court comes to the conclusion that the wife has instituted the case with the intention to wreak vengeance, then the proceedings can be quashed.
In the present case, the court stated that the court carefully went through the statements recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.
It is also stated that the court is of the view that the prima facie case has been made out only against the husband and parents-in-law of the wife herein, and the prosecution will however continue against them.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019
As far as the father-in-law and mother-in-law are concerned, the parents-in-law hail from Bangalore and the case is being conducted at the Nagercoil hence the personal appearance of the father-in-law and mother-in-law is dispensed with.
The parents-in-law must be represented by the council, and they should appear as and when required by the trial court. The case is from the year 2014 and now the case has been transferred to the Additional Mahila Court, Nagercoil and the case has been re-numbered.
The Additional Mahila court is directed to conclude the entire proceedings on merits and in accordance with the law, within a period of five months from the date of receipt of the order.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019
It is further stated that as far as the brother and sister-in-law, the husband of the sister-in-law, and the Uncle-in-law is concerned, the court is of the view that the allegations are rather general in nature.
It is also stated that since the wife perceived herself as a victim, she chose to implicate all the members of the husband’s family.
Furthermore, it is stated that it is seen that the sister-in-law married to her husband who is also one of the petitioners, and the sister-in-law have her own separate matrimonial home.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019
It is further stated that there is absolutely no justification for implicating the Uncle-in-law of the wife.
In view of the above discussion, the court held that the impugned proceedings deserve to be quashed insofar as the sister-in-law, husband of sister-in-law, brother-in-law and uncle-in-law are concerned.
Therefore, the criminal petition is allowed for the sister-in-law, husband of sister-in-law, brother-in-law, and uncle-in-law, and the criminal original petition is dismissed for the husband and the parents-in-law, and consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
_________________________________________________
Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgment 17.09.2019
In this article, the Madras High Court held that the wife has instituted the case with the intention to wreak vengeance, then the proceedings can be quashed.
In the present case, the court stated that the court carefully went through the statements recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. The prima facie case has been made out only against the husband and parents-in-law of the wife herein, and the prosecution will however continue against them. The criminal original petition is dismissed for the husband and the parents-in-law, and consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
The court also held that the sister-in-law and the husband of the sister-in-law live in her own separate matrimonial home and there is no justification for implicating the Uncle-in-law.
As far as the brother and sister-in-law, the husband of the sister-in-law, and the Uncle-in-law are concerned, the court is of the view that the allegations are rather general in nature and that the impugned proceedings deserve to be quashed against them.
Therefore, the F.I.R. against the brother and sister-in-law, the husband of the sister-in-law and Uncle-in-law is hereby quashed.
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment