498A Quash Judgement 09.12.2021 – Karnataka High Court General allegations made against the mother-in-law, father-in-law & married sister-in-law are false & sweeping. FIR Quashed.
 |
| 498A Quash Judgement 09.12.2021 |
Read More Judgements on 498a Quash
Atma Sudhir Shetty vs The State By on 09.12.2021
498A Quash Judgement 09.12.2021- in this article, the Karnataka High court has held that the allegations made against the mother-in-law, father-in-law & married sister-in-law are general & sweeping as no specific incident is quoted against any of the petitioners in the complaint. Allegations are majorly made against the husband. Further, it was held by the Karnataka High court that proceedings under Section 498A and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioners would amount to failure of justice. Therefore, the FIR & proceedings were quashed by the Karnataka High court.
Case Brief - 498A Quash Judgement 09.12.2021
The marriage of husband & wife got solemnized on 12.05.2017 according to their rituals. After their marriage initially, everything was going just fine. But after some time the relationship between the husband & the wife got sore and it is contended that it has reached the height of irretrievable extent.
It is contended by the wife that the petitioners have caused cruelty to the wife on account of dowry demand. Because of this cruelty, the wife has lodged an FIR against the petitioners under section 498A of IPC and Section 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 before the jurisdictional Police on 02.04.2018.
It is clearly contended in the complaint that the husband and other petitioners, in this case, i.e.; mother-in-law, father-in-law & sister-in-law all together have demanded dowry and if the said dowry demand is not fulfilled then the wife would not be allowed to reside in the matrimonial home.
Except for the above-stated allegation, no further allegation is made against the family members of the husband. But several allegations have been made solely against the husband. One of which is torture. Situations of torture are indicated in the complaint against the husband.
BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH
Arguments - 498A Quash Judgement 09.12.2021
The advocate of the petitioners submitted that the mother-in-law & both the sister-in-law of the wife at no occasion has ever resided with the complainant. No specific allegation is made out in the complaint against the wife’s in-laws, i.e.; petitioners of the present case.
It is also submitted that the married sister-in-law is a permanent resident of Gujarat and has been residing along with her husband for more than seven years. Similarly, another sister-in-law is a permanent resident of Maharashtra. both of them have never resided with the wife and her husband.
Their implication in the present complaint is just to harass and humiliate the relatives of the husband. This feels to be the only point to file the present complaint against the petitioners. Allowing the complainant to continue with this complaint would be considered an abuse of the process of law.
Further, he submitted that all the allegations are majorly made against the husband and further contended that even against the husband, there is no overt act alleged for the trial to continue against the petitioners.
Advocate for the wife has remained absent throughout. Even after several notices, he hasn’t appeared before the Hon’ble court. Hence, the matter would be decided in his absence after the advocates of the state & petitioners are heard.
_______________________________________________________
Read 10 Tips to Counter Claim of Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. when life leaves the husband without any reasonable cause and maintenance can be denied.
Referred cases - 498A Quash Judgement 09.12.2021
1. Preeti Gupta and Anr V. State of Jharkhand
2. Geeta Mehrotra and Anr v. State of Uttar Pradesh
3. Rashmi Chopra and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh
4. K. Subba Rao v. State of Telangana
5. T.S.K. Ashwin Kumar v. State of Telangana
6. Kailash Chandra Agrawal v. State of U.P.
________________________________________________________________________________
Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions
__________________________________________________________________________________
Court opinion - 498A Quash Judgement 09.12.2021
Karnataka High court is of the view that there being no specific allegations made against any one of the petitioners except common general allegations against everyone criminal proceedings against the petitioners should not be continued.
Coming back to the allegations in the complaint only indicates that the allegations made against the petitioners for the offences made under Section 498A and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are general and sweeping. No specific dates or details of any incident have been mentioned in the complaint.
The fact that all relatives of the husband, i.e.; father, mother, and sister have been dragged in clearly indicates that the complaint was filed with a view to wreak vengeance & harass the petitioners.
Therefore, Karnataka High court in the light of the complaint, the FIR and the law laid down by the Apex Court in the present case, all the offences under Section 498A of IPC, the proceedings against the petitioners, except the husband, if permitted to continue would, without any doubt, degenerate into harassment against the petitioners and would result in the miscarriage of justice. Therefore, the proceedings indulging the petitioners in the case would be quashed.
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
Conclusion - 498A Quash Judgement 09.12.2021
In this article, the Karnataka High court has held that the allegations made against the entire family of the husband are general and sweeping. The allegations made in the FIR are lodged with the clear motive of harassing the petitioners and wreaking vengeance. It is clear by going through the complaint lodged that allegations are majorly made against the husband.
Therefore, proceedings against the husband cannot be interfered with or interjected. But, the trial against other family members against whom only omnibus statements are made, was required to be discontinued as the continuance of that against in-laws would have resulted in a miscarriage of justice. Therefore, the proceedings indulging the petitioners in the case would be quashed.
Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Instagram
Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment