498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021 - In-Laws living separately from the Couple and no specific role in the incident. FIR Quashed.

498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021 - In-Laws living separately from the Couple and no specific role in the incident. FIR Quashed.

498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021
498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021

498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021 - Chargesheet against Father-in-law, Brother-in-law, Relatives, and Married two sisters-in-law were all living separately from the husband & wife and no specific role shown against them in the incident does not constitute a case against them. FIR Quashed.

Case Brief 498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021 

The marriage of the couple was solemnized on 17.06.2000. The father-in-law and brother-in-law and two married sisters and their husbands are the close relatives of her husband. Out of their marriage, husband and wife have two children aged 13 years and 5 years. 

After their marriage, the husband and wife lived in Saudi Arabia from December 2000 to 23.05.2012. On their return to India, husband and wife started living separately from the in-laws in Bengaluru and Mangaluru.

The wife filed a complaint alleging that the in-laws drove her out of the matrimonial home about 7 to 8 months prior to the complaint. Since then she has been living in her parental home at Mangaluru.

The husband sold 250 grams of gold jewelry given to her by her parents at the time of marriage and squandered that money. In-laws subjected her to physical and mental cruelty in connection with their demand for additional dowry and threatened that they will burn her if she fails to fulfill their demand.

Her husband was addicted to alcohol, Narcotic drugs, had an extramarital relationship with a salesgirl, and was harassing her in that background. She had been to see her father at the hospital, her husband came there, assaulted her and her brothers, and caused injuries.

On the basis of the said complaint, the Police registered FIR, conducted the investigation, and filed the chargesheet as aforesaid. On receiving the chargesheet, the trial Court took cognizance of the offenses, summoned the in-laws to face the trial.

Father-in-law and the sister’s husband are implicated only with an intention to harass them. No case is made out against them. Both the sisters of her husband were married much prior to the marriage of the husband and the complainant and living separately in their matrimonial homes.

The brother-in-law and both the sisters are also living in different places and they were falsely implicated in the case.

Arguments 498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021 

It was the complainant and her brothers who assaulted the husband on 19.04.2015. On the basis of the complaint filed by the husband in that regard, the Police registered a complaint against the brothers of the complainant. 

The wound certificate of the complainant shows that he had suffered the injuries. The statement of the wife shows that she and her brother had not suffered any injury and they have not taken any treatment. The matrimonial dispute is given the color of a criminal case, therefore liable to be quashed.

Per contra, an advocate of the wife opposes the petition saying that the chargesheet is already filed. At this stage, the High Court cannot embark on inquiry to find out whether the case for conviction is made out.

Even in the complaint, it is stated that she delayed filing of the complaint expecting that the accused would come for a settlement. The particulars of time and place of cruelty by father-in-law and sister-in-law in connection with the alleged demand of 25,00,000/- are absent.

Admittedly, both the sisters-in-law were married much prior to their marriage and living in far-off places in their respective matrimonial homes. Admittedly, the other petitioners were also not living with the husband and wife. 



Referred Cases 498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021 

1. The State  of  Haryana and others v. Bhajanlal and others

2. Indian Oil Corporation v.  NEPC India Ltd and others

3. G. Sagar Suri vs. State of UP

Court Opinion 498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021 

It is stated in the complaint that even if they have taken their face value and accepted in their absolutely do not prima facie constitute any offense or make out a case against the in-laws.

Where the substantial allegations made in the complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offense and make out a case against the accused.

Where the submissions made in the complaint are totally vague and innately uncertain on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the in-laws.

The proceedings were evidently attended with malafide and maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to her personal grudge.

Conclusion 498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021 

The High Court exercises its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code. Jurisdiction under this Section has to be exercised to avert abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In the light of the guidelines laid in the above judgments, this Court has to examine whether there was material to proceed against the in-laws.

The wife alleged that the father-in-law and sister’s husband after the marriage harassed her for the sake of additional dowry. But, after a lapse of 15 years, the complaint purportedly filed the FIR.

Then what is left with regard to the cruelty is the incident at Mangaluru. Neither the complainant nor any of the charge sheet witnesses impute any role to the in-laws in the said incident. Therefore, on looking into the complaint and chargesheet material itself, it can be said that the proceedings against them are liable to be quashed.

So far as the husband, there are specific allegations that on a particular date, time and place, he assaulted the wife and her brothers. He himself has filed a complaint against the brothers of the husband alleging assault on him at the same time and place. Under the circumstances, so far as the husband it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings. Therefore the petition is partly allowed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram
Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights


    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment