498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018 – No Specific Allegation/detail against the Father-in-Law living separately, FIR Quashed.
 |
| 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018 |
Read More Judgements on 498a Quash
498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018- In this article, the Punjab-Haryana High Court held that a general allegation has been raised against the father-in-law and there is no specific allegation/ detail against him, to constitute an offense under Sections 406, 498A, and 506 of the IPC. The FIR does not reveal that there is any specific mention that the father-in-law had raised a demand for dowry and the FIR has been registered against him only to harass the family members. Therefore, the Criminal Proceedings against the father-in-law are hereby quashed.
Case Brief- 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018
According to the facts mentioned in the FIR, filed by the father of the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 24.04.2011.
It is stated that soon after the marriage, the wife was harassed by her husband, brother-in-law, the wife of brother-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, and sister-in-law on account of bringing inadequate dowry.
It is also stated that in May 2011, a demand was made by her husband and all In-laws to the wife stating therein that the husband is going to Canada and in order to secure a visa for the wife a sum of 15 lakh should be brought.
Case Brief- 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018
The father of the wife made arrangements and, after borrowing money, handed over the same to the family of the husband. Thereafter, the husband left for Canada in July 2011, and the wife left in June 2012. A female child was born to the wife and her husband on 23.09.2012.
It is further stated that the husband and all the In-laws continued to harass the wife and even the custody of the minor child was handed over to the brother-in-law of the wife.
Upon this, the father of the wife filed an FIR dated 25.07.2014 under Sections 498A, 406, and 506 of IPC at the Police Station, district Moga against the husband, brother-in-law, the wife of brother-in-law, mother-in-law, father-in-law, and sister-in-law.
The matter was investigated, and it was recommended that an FIR should be registered against the husband and father-in-law, and the other In-laws mentioned in the FIR were found to be innocent.
_________________________________________________
Arguments- 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018
The advocate appearing on behalf of the father-in-law stated that the FIR registered is not sustainable on account of the fact that no specific allegation has been made in the FIR against the father-in-law and all allegations raised therein are general in nature.
It is also stated that the wife left for Canada along with the father and mother-in-law in the month of June 2012 and on reaching Canada, the father-in-law shifted residence from Abbotsford to Edmonton to reside with his daughter, which is at a distance of more than a thousand kilometers.
It is further stated that when the father-in-law left the residence of the wife and her husband to reside with his daughter, the wife called the police in Canada and leveled false allegations against him. The matter was investigated, and all allegations were found to be false, and the father-in-law was declared innocent by the Canadian Police.
Arguments- 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018
It is also stated that the matrimonial dispute between the husband and the wife arose in Canada and therefore, the court would have no jurisdiction to entertain the matter and the Investigation itself would show that the police came to the conclusion that only the husband harassed the wife for the demand of dowry in Canada.
Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of FIR and all consequential proceedings against the father-in-law.
On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the father of the wife submitted that the allegations, as set out in the FIR, are true and that the wife has been harassed on account of bringing inadequate dowry.
Arguments- 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018
It is also submitted that the husband had taken away the custody of the minor child and handed it over to his brother and the custody proceedings had been initiated.
Therefore, it is prayed that there is no question of quashing the FIR and all consequential proceedings against the father-in-law.
_________________________________________________
____________________________________
Referred Judgements- 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018
- Harmanpreet Singh Ahluwalia and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Others
- B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another
- Rajesh Sharma and others Vs. State of U.P. and another
Court’s Opinion- 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018
It is stated that the FIR does not reveal that there is any specific mention that the father-in-law had raised a demand of dowry or that there was any such entrustment of the same to him.
It is also stated that a general allegation has been raised against the father-in-law that there was harassment on account of Inadequate dowry and that the father-in-law had demanded a sum of 15 lakhs in order to send the wife to Canada.
It is further stated that there is no mention in the said FIR of any gold ornaments etc. having been given to the father-in-law, and as noticed by the Investigating Officer, the harassment caused to the wife for the demand of dowry was in Canada.
Court’s Opinion- 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018
It is also stated by the court that a reply has not been filed to controvert the submissions made in the petition or the statement that a complaint filed by the wife in Canada against the father-in-law was found to be false.
Even if it is taken into account that the father-in-law harassed the wife for the demand of dowry, it was a demand that was raised in Canada, outside the territorial jurisdiction of the courts at Moga, and therefore, the offense, if any, had been committed in Canada.
Furthermore, the court stated that even otherwise, there is no specific role or injury or demand of dowry or entrustment of dowry or misappropriation of the same against the father-in-law and on the same set of allegations, the other In-laws mentioned in the FIR have been found to be innocent.
Court’s Opinion- 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018
The court also stated that it is apparently clear that the FIR has been registered against the father-in-law herein only to harass the family members and any allegation regarding the custody of a child is not a dispute with the father-in-law and pertains to a dispute with the brother-in-law.
The court further stated that the proceedings have been initiated here in India whereas the wife is residing in Canada and not a single instance has been given as to when or as to how or in what manner the father-in-law is involved in the commission of the alleged offenses and the complaint, lodged in Canada, was investigated and found to be false.
In view of the above discussion, the court held that there is no specific allegation/ detail against the father-in-law, to constitute an offense under Sections 406, 498A, and 506 of the IPC.
Therefore, the instant petition is allowed, and the FIR dated 25.07.2014, under Sections 498A, 406, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station, District Moga, and all consequential proceedings against the Father-in-law are hereby quashed.
_________________________________________________
Conclusion- 498A quash Judgment 04.05.2018
In this article, the Punjab-Haryana High Court held that the FIR does not reveal that there is any specific mention that the father-in-law had raised a demand of dowry or that there was any such entrustment of the same to him and a general allegation has been raised against him.
It is also held that there is no mention in the said FIR of any gold ornaments etc. having been given to the father-in-law, and there is no specific allegation/ detail against the father-in-law, to constitute an offense under Sections 406, 498A, and 506 of the IPC.
Therefore, the FIR against the petitioner is hereby quashed.
Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment