498A Discharge Judgements 18.08.2021- 498A Discharge U/S 227 Cr.P.C. Allowed. Case Dismissed.
 |
| 498A Discharge Judgements 18.08.2021 |
Read More Judgements on 498a Quash
498A Discharge Judgements 18.08.2021- 498A FIR after two years of living separately and after filing a divorce petition is considered to be a counterblast and After Thought to it. Hence High Court discharged the accused Husband and his parents under section 227 Cr.P.C. Case Dismissed.
Case Brief 498A Discharge Judgements 18.08.2021
As per the husband and his parents, the court below has not considered the factual aspects of the matter in consonance with the actual existing legal position and ignoring the same, framed charges against them.
The husband entered into marriage at Jagannath Mandir, Jabalpur, and out of the said wedlock, the wife gave birth to a child on 01.03.2016. The wife belongs to the 'Gond' community and after marriage, the husband and wife both were residing together.
One day wife started living separately as the relations between them were not cordial and there was some dispute between them. When it became almost impossible to settle the disputes, the husband filed a suit on 07.05.2019 seeking a decree of divorce under Section 13A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1959.
The notice was issued to the wife and after receiving notice and knowing about the filing the divorce petition, she lodged a complaint to the Police Station and after enquiring about the complaint, the police registered the offense against the accused persons under Section 498A of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The offense has also been registered under the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions
______________________________________________________
______________________________________________________
Arguments 498A Discharge Judgements 18.08.2021
The advocate of the parents moved an application before the Court below under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. for discharging them because the complaint made by his wife is nothing but a counter-blast, just to create pressure upon the husband to get his petition of divorce withdrawn.
The said application has been considered by the court below and rejected vide impugned order dated 16.02.2021 thereby not considering the aspect that a false complaint has been made by the wife considering the fact that divorce petition has already been filed by the husband.
It is also contended by an advocate for the parents-in-law that though the complainant originally belonged to 'Gond' community, which comes under the Scheduled Caste category after marriage with the husband, she did not remain to be in the SC category, and as such, cases relating to the offenses of SC/ST Act are not made out against the parents-in-law.
The court below rejected the application mentioning therein that at the stage of framing of charges, the court has a very limited scope of interference and in view of the material placed by the prosecution, even if suspicion arises regarding false implication, the accused cannot be discharged.
Advocate appearing for the parents-in-law criticized the order passed by the Court below and submits that in view of the existing factual position, admittedly after living separately from the husband, the wife has not made any report to the police and has also not made any complaint with regard to demand of dowry nor attributed anything against her in-laws that they have committed any offense relating to SC/ST Act.
He submits that the wife started living separately with effect from 02.01.2016 and after almost three years, he filed a suit for a decree of divorce under Section 13A of the Hindu Marriage Act and till then there was no complaint made by the wife but only after receiving the notice, she has made a false complaint.
According to the advocate of the parents-in-law, there are several judgments of the Supreme Court as well as the High Court that under such a circumstance, the FIR can be quashed and accused can be discharged and, therefore, he submits that the court below has not considered this aspect, therefore, he is asking that the order of the court below deserves to be set aside and the parents-in-law be discharged from the offenses registered against them.
Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions
_________________________________________
Referred Cases 498A Discharge Judgements 18.08.2021
- Prashant Bharti v. State (NCT of Delhi).
- Tarun and Others v. State of M.P. and another.
- Geeta Mehrotra v. State of U.P
- G.V. Rao vs. L.H.v. Prasad & Ors.
- Ramesh Rajagopal v. Devi Polymers (P) Ltd.
- Rohit v. State of M.P.
- Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia and Ors. v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre and Ors.
- Rukmini Narvekar v. Vijaya Satardekar.
- Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. N.R. Vairamani.
- Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal
- Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre.
Arguments 498A Discharge Judgements 18.08.2021
From the arguments advanced by advocates of the parties and the documents available on record, it is clear that undisputedly, the marriage was solemnized between the husband and wife in the year 2015 and due to bitterness developed in their relations, they started living separately.
On perusal of record, nothing has come to indicate that from the date of living separately till the date of lodging the FIR, any complaint has ever been made by the wife to any of the authorities or to the police attributing against the parents-in-law that they have ever demanded any dowry or created any act which comes under the provisions of SC/ST Act or any offense was made under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
From the FIR, it is clear that the same was made on 09.01.2020 whereas the husband had filed a suit seeking a decree of divorce. The notice was issued to the wife and after the same was served upon her, she filed the complaint.
A chargesheet has been filed by the parents-in-law and from the statement of the complainant, it reflects that at the time of the complaint, she had knowledge about the filing of the matrimonial case seeking a decree of divorce.
It is also clear from the statement that the wife after coming to know that her husband was going to get married to a lady namely Bhuvneshwari then only lodged the report to the police and made several allegations of dowry and also of offenses relating to the Atrocities Act.
Court Opinion 498A Discharge Judgements 18.08.2021
The High Court in a number of cases has observed that in a case where the complaint is made by the wife against the husband and his family members only after filing a petition for divorce then the same is considered to be a counter-blast, just to create pressure upon the husband so that he may withdraw the case relating to the decree of divorce.
It is also observed by the High Court that if the fact indicates that the wife has not raised any voice alleging demand of dowry for long and has also not approached any authority regarding her grievances, but only after filing a suit by the husband complaint is made by the wife then the said complaint is considered to be a counter-blast and prosecution is considered to be an act apparently to harass the husband and his family members and such an FIR has been quashed.
Nowadays it is a general tendency to implicate in-laws by the wife in case of demand of dowry just to take revenge on account of bitterness emerged on account of non-adjustment in the matrimonial house.
Court Opinion 498A Discharge Judgements 18.08.2021
The High court considering the law as has been laid down in the referred cases, relying upon the view taken by the Supreme Court, found substance in the submission made by an advocate of the in-laws that in the present case also, the FIR has been lodged by the wife only to harass her husband and his family members.
Her statement filed along with the chargesheet clearly reflects that she approached the police and the only husband was going to marry another lady.
The allegations made against the in-laws in the report lodged to the police and the statement given by her were relating to the incidents that occurred almost two years prior to the date of FIR. She did not disclose as to why at the relevant point of time, she did not make any complaint.
She has also not disclosed and not stated when she started living separately from 2016, she did not lodge any report to the police but only after coming to know about the filing of the suit that the husband is with another lady, FIR was lodged to the police.
Conclusion 498A Discharge Judgements 18.08.2021
In this article it is cleared that the law laid down FIR lodged under Section 498A of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act after coming to know that husband is going to marry another lady, alleging incidents occurred almost 2 years prior to the date of lodging the complaint and after filing suit for seeking a decree of divorce under Section 13A of Hindu Marriage Act.
The First Information Report is nothing but an afterthought and counterblast to the suit filed by the husband for seeking a decree of divorce. Charges framed are liable to be quashed. Hence FIR was Quashed.
Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment