498A Quash Judgement 05.01.2022 - Bombay High court – allegations made against the married sisters-in-law are vague and absurd in nature. FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 05.01.2022 - Bombay High court – allegations made against the married sisters-in-law are vague and absurd in nature. FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 05.01.2022 - Bombay High court – allegations made against the married sisters-in-law are vague and absurd in nature. FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 05.01.2022

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

Kakaji Pundlik Pawar And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra on 5.01.2022

498A Quash Judgement 05.01.2022 – In this article the Bombay High court has held that the allegations made against the married sisters-in-law are vague and absurd in nature. It is clear after reading the complaint that the allegations in the complaint are majorly made against the husband, father-in-law, & mother-in-law who are not petitioners in front of this high court. Hence, the high court is of the view to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners and the FIR against the sisters-in-law.


Case Brief - 498A Quash Judgement 05.01.2022

The husband and wife got married in accordance with their caste rituals and customs. Everything was running smoothly between the husband and wife in the initial stage of their matrimonial life. The wife was residing with her husband in the matrimonial home.

Until the day the husband, father-in-law, and the mother-in-law started to demand a certain amount of money from the wife as dowry. On account of non-fulfilment to bring the certain demanded amount of dowry from her parents the wife was subjected to cruelty and harassment from the husband, father-in-law, and mother-in-law.

It is clear from reading the complaint that the married sisters-in-law were not residing with the husband and wife at any point in their matrimonial life. Both the married sisters-in-law were residing along with their husbands in their respective matrimonial homes.

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

Arguments - 498A Quash Judgement 05.01.2022

Advocate of the petitioners submitted that only the names of the petitioners are mentioned in the FIR, the allegations made against them are general in nature without quoting any specific role to any of them.

He further submitted that the allegations have majorly been made against the husband, father-in-law, and mother-in-law. The husband is not before the court. However, the petitioners’ father-in-law and mother-in-law have withdrawn their applications seeking to quash the FIR.

In addition to that, the advocate submitted that the petitioners before the court are married sisters-in-law and are residing along with their respective husbands at their respective matrimonial homes. It is a clear case of over implication. The allegations made against the petitioners are absurd and vague. Therefore, there is no triable case against them.

The advocate of the wife had submitted that the names of the petitioners are mentioned in the FIR with a specific role attributed to each of them. Though, sisters-in-law are married and are residing at their respective matrimonial homes at Nashik. Still, there are specific allegations against each of them.

Hence, there is a triable case against them. There is no evidence in the application and the application is liable to be dismissed.

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

Referred cases - 498A Quash Judgement 05.01.2022

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 05.01.2022

After going through the allegations made in the complaint against the petitioners’ the high court is of the view that though we find the names of the petitioners in the FIR, however, the allegations made against them are general in nature without attributing any specific role.

It seems that the allegations made about the unlawful demand and the cruelty extended to the wife on account of non-fulfilment of the said amount, have been made mainly against the father-in-law and mother-in-law, however, they are not before us as petitioners.

The present petitioners herein are the married sisters-in-law of the husband and on the basis of the vague and general complaint made against them which is silent about the precise acts of the petitioners, the criminal proceedings are held liable to be quashed.

_________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________


Conclusion - 498A Quash Judgement 05.01.2022

In this article, it is held by the Bombay High court that the allegations made against the married sisters-in-law are absurd in nature as both the sisters at no point were residing with the husband and wife during their matrimonial life.

In the present case, though only the names of the petitioners are mentioned in the FIR and the allegations made against them, are absurd and do not make out any case, even from a reading of the complaint and if the allegations against the petitioners are held to be proved, no case is made out. It is well settled that if the allegations are absurd and vague in nature and do not make out any case against them, criminal proceedings initiated should be quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

WhatsApp




    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment

0 comments:

Post a Comment