498a Quash Judgment 23.10.2020- General allegations against In-Laws are an abuse of process of law u/s 498A. FIR Quashed.
 |
| 498a quash judgments 23.10.2020 |
498a Quash Judgment 23.10.2020- Any General allegations with no specific incident & specific date against mother-in-law, sister-in-law, and brother-in-law is a total abuse of the process of law u/s 384, 498(A), 504,506 R/W 34 OF IPC AND SECTION 3 AND 4 OF Dowry Probation ACT. FIR Quashed.
Brief Facts 498a Quash Judgment 23.10.2020:-
This petition is filed by in-laws to quash the proceedings registered for the offense punishable under Sections 384, 498A, 504, 506 read with 34 of IPC and
Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
It is stated in the complaint is that the marriage of the complainant was performed on 13.04.2008. After marriage, the complainant has been residing in the matrimonial house with her husband and her in-laws.
Ever since the date of
marriage, the husband has been harassing, humiliating, and teasing the complainant
without any reason and he has been demanding her to bring a huge amount of
money from time to time.
In-laws
are supporting husbands in their illegal acts. In-Laws have colluded and
extracted gold articles from the complainant. In one instance, the husband had
forcibly taken the gold jewelry of the complainant and has kept it in the
custody of accused No.4.
The
husband was harassing the complainant, even sometimes expelled her from the
matrimonial house in consensus with other in-laws members. Husband has been
demanding to bring money and he is coming to the house after midnight and
harassing the complainant.
On 15.12.2013 at 6:00 p.m. the complainant and her parents asked her husband to return her gold jewelry, at that time in-laws, have abused the complainant and her parents in bad language and held out the threat of murdering her if she lodges a complaint against them.
Thus, in-laws have committed the offense u/s
384, 385, 498A, 506 (2) read with 34 of IPC and 3& 4 of Dowry Probation
Act.
_________________________________________
Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions
_________________________________________
Arguments 498a Quash Judgment 23.10.2020
Learned counsel for the in-laws would contend that there are no specific allegations in the complaint against mother-in-law, sister-in-law, and brother-in-law.
The
mother-in-law and brother-in-law are in Australia. There is a delay in filing
the complaint.
Lower
Court has failed to consider the facts of the FIR and the complaint allegations
and see whether the facts stated therein the complaint attract prima-facie case
against these petitioners and whether there was at all any material on record
to attract the charges against the in-laws
The complaint was filed against all the family members with a malafide intention to
satisfy her ego. Thus, the proceedings initiated against the in-laws are liable
to be quashed.
In
support of the above arguments, advocate for the in-laws has relied on the
following judgments:
a)
Geeta Mehrotra and another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another;
b)
Ramesh and others vs. the State of T.N.
c
) G.V.Rao vs. L.H.V Prasad and others.
The advocate of respondents /complainant submitted that there are specific
allegations against these petitioners that they have instigated the husband to
commit the illegal acts to harass the complainant to get the dowry and gold
ornaments. The complainant has tolerated their cruelty for many years, and
later a complaint has been filed.
_________________________________________
BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH
Read Related Article - D.V. Case dismissed Judgment 22.07.2020
Courts Opinion 498a Quash Judgment 23.10.2020
The allegations, in this case, are mainly against the husband. The in-laws are involved by making general and vague allegations without mentioning even a single incident against them.
There are no specific dates on which the in-laws
had personally caused cruelty to the daughter-in-law.
The submission made by the advocate for the in-laws that the Mother-in-law & Brother-in-law is residing in Australia has not been denied.
Thus, the
allegations against the mother-in-law, sister-in-law, and brother-in-law in the whole incident appeared to be sweeping allegations.
Hence,
it cannot be overlooked that it would be a total abuse of the process of law if
the proceedings are allowed to be continued as against mother-in-law,
sister-in-law, and brother-in-law.
In view of the above discussion, the Hon’ble Court is of the view that the criminal proceedings shall have to be quashed in exercise of inherent powers insofar as in-laws are concerned.
Hence, the Court proceedings u/s 384, 498A,
504, 506 read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, as
against in-laws are quashed.
_________________________________________
Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions
_________________________________________
Conclusion 498a Quash Judgment 23.10.2020
In
this Article the High Court quashed the proceedings against mother-in-law,
sister-in-law and brother-in-law under section 384, 498A, 504, 506 read with 34
of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
The court had quashed the F.I.R. on the grounds that the allegations against the petitioners are general and vague allegations without mentioning even a single incident against them.
There are no specific dates on which these petitioners
had personally caused cruelty to the daughter-in-law. Hence the Court Quashed
the FIR.
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment