498A Quash Judgement 21.12.2021 – Bombay High court – General allegations made against the husband, Father-in-law, Mother-in-law & married sisters-in-law are absurd in nature. FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 21.12.2021 – Bombay High court – General allegations made against the husband, Father-in-law, Mother-in-law & married sisters-in-law are absurd in nature. FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 21.12.2021 – Bombay High court – General allegations made against the husband, Father-in-law, Mother-in-law & married sisters-in-law are absurd in nature. FIR Quashed.
 498A Quash Judgement 21.12.2021

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

Rahul Madhav Phate And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra on 21.12.2021

498A Quash Judgement 21.12.2021 – In this article, the Bombay High court has held that the allegations made against the petitioners are absurd in nature as the mere mention of the names of the petitioners is not a sufficient cause to attract the provisions of Sections 498 A, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the proceedings arising therefrom. Further, it was held by the Bombay High court that even if the allegations against the petitioners are taken at their face value even then no case is made out against them. Therefore, the FIR & the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners is liable to be quashed.


Case Brief - 498A Quash Judgement 21.12.2021

The marriage of the husband and wife got solemnized according to their wish and in accordance with their rituals. Everything was running smoothly until the parents of the husband started to demand a certain amount of dowry.

The wife also stated that she was subjected to ill-treatment on account of the non-fulfilment of the dowry amount. It is stated by the wife in the complaint that she is residing at her parents’ home. Majorly the allegations in the complaint are made against the husband.

Arguments - 498A Quash Judgement 21.12.2021

Advocate of the petitioners submitted that although the names of the petitioners are mentioned in the FIR, the allegations made against them are general in nature without attributing any particular role against any of them or without quoting any specific incident.

He further submitted that the married sisters-in-law are residing along with their husbands in their respective matrimonial homes & never had a chance to reside with the husband & the wife. Therefore, he submits that it is a clear case of over-implication.

Advocate of the wife in his counter submitted that the names of the petitioners are mentioned in the FIR with specific roles attributed to each of them. He also stated that the wife was subjected to ill-treatment on account of the non-fulfilment of the dowry demand. Therefore, there is no substance in this criminal application and the same is liable to be dismissed.


Referred cases - 498A Quash Judgement 21.12.2021

1. Geeta Mehrotra and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh

2. Neelu Chopra and others v. Bharti

3. Taramani Parakh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

_________________________________________

_________________________________________


Court opinion - 498A Quash Judgement 21.12.2021

In this article, the court says that the allegations made against the petitioners are not sufficient to attract the provisions of Section 498A IPC. By reading the complaint it is understandable that just mentioning the names of the petitioners in the FIR doesn’t make them accountable for the offence committed under section 498A IPC.

No specific incident is mentioned against any of the petitioners to make them liable for punishment. It is also clear that allegations are mainly made against the husband.

Therefore, the court is of the opinion that if the allegations are absurd in nature and if no case is made out, the proceedings are liable to be quashed. Hence, the High court passed the order for quashing the FIR and criminal proceedings against the petitioners.

_______________________________________________________


_______________________________________________________

Conclusion - 498A Quash Judgement 21.12.2021

In this article, the Bombay High court has held that the allegations made against the petitioners are absurd in nature. The wife has merely dragged the names of the petitioners just to make them suffer through the criminal proceedings.

Hence, it is clearly a case of over-implication as it is well settled that if the allegations are absurd in nature and if no case is made out, the proceedings are liable to be quashed. In this case, even if the allegations against the petitioners are held to be proved, no case is made out.


Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

WhatsApp




    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment

0 comments:

Post a Comment