498a Quash Judgements by Supreme Court 27.09.2019 - Vague Allegations made against Mother-in-Law and Father-in-law do not warrant criminal prosecution against them, FIR Quashed
[ Read more 498a Quash Judgments]
 |
| 498a Quash Judgement by supreme court |
498a Quash Judgements by Supreme Court - Supreme Court held that the allegations that are made against the Mother-in-Law and Father-in-law are vague and do not warrant criminal prosecution against them.
Supreme Court opined that the appellants, whom complainant did not reside except for a period of 10 days immediately after the marriage, cannot be forced to face a criminal prosecution.
[ Read more 498A Quash Judgements by Supreme Court]
Vyankatrao
Jangale vs The State Of Maharashtra on 27 September 2019
Respondent
No.2 married (Original Petitioner No.1) on 20.02.2014. On 01.03.2014, the
Respondent No.2 along with her husband went to Boston, the United States of
America, where the husband of Respondent No.2 was working as a Scientist.
There
was matrimonial discord between Respondent No.2 and her husband. Respondent
No.2 came back to India and filed a complaint which was registered as FIR
No.344 of 2017 at Shivajinagar Police Station, Latur on 19.10.2017 for the
offenses under Sections 498A, 406, 323 and 504 read with Section 34 IPC.
It was stated in the complaint by Respondent No.2 that her husband and the appellants who is Reason: the mother-in-law, father-in-law, the sister-in-law, and her the husband was ill-treating her and was demanding more dowry. Specific allegations of physical assault were made against her husband for not complying with the demand of dowry.
498a Quash Judgements by supreme court 27.09.2019
It was stated in the complaint by Respondent No.2 that her husband and the appellants who is Reason: the mother-in-law, father-in-law, the sister-in-law, and her the husband was ill-treating her and was demanding more dowry. Specific allegations of physical assault were made against her husband for not complying with the demand of dowry.
The
appellants, the husband of Respondent No.2, the sister-in-law and her husband
filed an application for quashing the complaint in the Bombay High Court.
498a Quash Judgement by supreme court 27.09.2019
The High Court quashed the FIR in respect of Respondent No.2’s sister-in-law and her husband. However, the High Court dismissed the petition filed for quashing the FIR with respect to the appellants and the husband of Respondent No.2.
|
While
issuing notice, the Special Leave Petition filed by the husband of Respondent
No.2 was dismissed in view of the specific allegations made against him by
Respondent No.2. However, notice was issued only qua Appellant Nos.2 and 3 who
are the mother-in-law and father-in-law of Respondent No.2.
498a Quash Judgements by supreme court 27.09.2019
We
have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and Respondent No.2 and carefully
examined the FIR and the judgment of the High Court.
Respondent
No.2 lived in the matrimonial home only for a period of 10 days after the
marriage on 20.2.2014. Thereafter, she moved to the United States of America
along with her husband.
The allegations that are made against the appellants are vague and do not warrant criminal prosecution against them. 498a Quash Judgements by supreme court 27.09.2019 We are of the opinion that the appellants, who are the mother-in-law and father-in-law with whom Respondent No.2 did not reside except for a period of 10 days immediately after the marriage, cannot be forced to face criminal prosecution. It is relevant to note that there was no complaint of harassment during that period.
The allegations that are made against the appellants are vague and do not warrant criminal prosecution against them. 498a Quash Judgements by supreme court 27.09.2019 We are of the opinion that the appellants, who are the mother-in-law and father-in-law with whom Respondent No.2 did not reside except for a period of 10 days immediately after the marriage, cannot be forced to face criminal prosecution. It is relevant to note that there was no complaint of harassment during that period.
Therefore,
we quash the FIR registered at Shivajinagar Police Station, Latur dated
19.10.2017 for the offenses punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 323 and 504
read with Section 34 IPC as against mother-in-law and father-in-law.
498a Quash Judgements by supreme court 27.09.2019
|
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment