498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018-Vague and General Allegations against Second wife, Mother-in-law, Sisters-In-Law & other distant relatives, FIR Quashed.
 |
| 498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018 |
498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018- In this article, the Bombay High Court held that the allegations against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband are vague and general in nature. No specific instance or particular act was alleged or quoted in the FIR against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband, and all of them are residing at different places. Therefore, the Criminal Proceedings against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband are hereby quashed.
Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018
According to the facts mentioned in the Complaint dated 05.07.2014 filed by the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized twenty years prior to the filing of the complaint, and out of wedlock, the wife has one daughter and two sons.
It is stated that after the marriage, the wife went to the house of her husband for cohabitation, where the husband, his mother, sisters, and brothers were residing jointly.
It is also stated that for about three years after the marriage, the wife was treated well by the husband, mother-in-law, sisters-in-law, brothers-in-law, and other relatives of the husband but thereafter the husband and other family members started ill-treating the wife.
Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018
It is further stated that in the year 2006-07, the husband demanded Rs two lakh for purchasing a house and when the wife expressed her inability to pay the amount, the husband started beating her severely.
It is also stated that on 01.02.2014 the husband, mother-in-law, sisters-in-law, and other relatives of the husband came to the house of the wife in Mumbai and asked her to sign on a blank paper and asked to bring Rs fifty thousand from her brother and when the wife refused it they threatened to kill the wife and assaulted her by fists.
Furthermore, it is stated that on 12th and 13th March 2014 again the husband, mother-in-law, sisters-in-law, and other relatives of the husband asked the wife to sign on a blank paper and demanded Rs. fifty thousand and drove the wife out of the house and sent her to Jalgaon.
Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018
It is also stated that on 15.03.2014 the husband performed second marriage and the other family members of the husband helped the husband in his second marriage.
Upon this, the wife filed a complaint on 05.07.2014, and an FIR was registered against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband for the offenses punishable under Sections 498A, 494, 323, 504 read with Section 34 of IPC.
_________________________________________________
Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018
It is stated that the court heard the arguments of the advocate appearing on behalf of the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband, the APP appearing on behalf of the State, and the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife.
It is also stated by the court that on perusal of the contents of the FIR it appears that specific allegations of ill-treatment, the demand for money, and assault are made against the husband.
It is further stated that the allegations against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband are vague and general in nature.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018
It is also stated that no specific instance or particular act alleged or quoted in the FIR against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband, and it also appears that all the In-laws and other relatives of the husband are residing at different places.
Therefore, prima facie it appears that the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband have no concern with the family matters of the wife and the husband.
Furthermore, it is stated by the court that on perusal of the FIR it also appears that there is no material particular quoting any specific incident of visit or about ill-treatment or harassment at the hands of the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband to attract the ingredients of the Section 498A of IPC or other offenses alleged by the wife.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018
It is also stated by the court that the wife has made vague and general allegations against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband.
The court also stated that it appears that the husband divorced the wife on 26.02.2014 and the present complaint was filed on 05.07.2014, and also it appears from the record that the wife was not residing with the husband from 15.04.2013, and therefore the husband has issued notice to the wife for cohabitation.
Therefore, the allegations in the complaint against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband appear to be doubtful.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018
In view of the above discussion, the court held that to prevent the abuse of the process of the law, discretion needs to be exercised in respect of the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband.
Therefore, the application of the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband is allowed and relief is granted to them.
_________________________________________________
Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgment 06.08.2018
In this article, the Bombay High Court held that the wife has made vague and general allegations against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband.
It is also held that no specific instance or particular act alleged or quoted in the FIR against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband, and to prevent the abuse of process of the law, the discretion needs to be exercised in respect of them.
Therefore, the FIR against the second wife of the husband, mother-in-law, four sisters-in-law, and eight other relatives of the husband is hereby quashed.
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment