498a quash Judgement 10.02.2022 - Karnataka High Court – General and Omnibus allegations made against the husband and his relatives. FIR Quashed.

498a quash Judgement 10.02.2022 - Karnataka High Court – General and Omnibus allegations made against the husband and his relatives. FIR Quashed.

498a quash Judgement 10.02.2022 - Karnataka High Court – General and Omnibus allegations made against the husband and his relatives. FIR Quashed.
498a quash Judgement 10.02.2022

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash


Sri. Venkatareddy Alias ... vs The State Of Karnataka on 10.02.2022

498a quash Judgement 10.02.2022 – In this article, the Karnataka High court has held that the allegations made against the husband and his relatives are general and omnibus in nature without quoting any specific incident against them. Further, the Karnataka High court has held that it is clear by reading the FIR that majorly the allegations are made against the husband while they were residing in the USA. The allegations made against the petitioner's in-laws contribute to minor disputes which don’t attract the provisions of Section 498A IPC. Hence, the Karnataka High court has ordered to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Join Our Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Case Brief – 498a quash Judgement 10.02.2022

The wife and the husband got married on 13.10.2011 and were solemnized as per the rites and customs of their religion. Immediately after the marriage, the couple moved to the USA within 10 days of their marriage for their avocation.

It is alleged that the couple had a lot of problems between them in the USA which ultimately resulted in a complaint being lodged before the jurisdictional police when the wife came returned to India.

The complaint so filed became an FIR against the husband and other family members of the husband’s family. In the present petition, the husband of the wife is the only petitioner. Another criminal Petition is filed by the mother-law-law, a different Criminal Petition is filed by the sister-in-law of the wife who is a resident of Canada and another Criminal Petition is filed by the sister-in-law and her husband of the wife.

Police after investigation have filed the charge sheet in all these cases against all the accused. The registration of the crime and police filing charge sheet has driven all the petitioners to this Court in the subject petitions.

__________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

Arguments – 498A quash Judgement 10.02.2022

The advocate for the petitioners contended that the wife dragged all the family members of the husband in the criminal proceedings without any reason. The petitioners do not even reside in India as the couple in the case at hand.

It is further alleged that reading the complaint and the contents in the chargesheet clearly indicated that vague and omnibus allegations were made against all the members of the family whereas certain allegations were definitely raised against the husband. But none of the allegations mentioned in the complaint had happened in India.

All the allegations made of torture and harassment had happened outside India when the couple was residing in the USA and, therefore, contended that the trial cannot be conducted against the husband in the present case in India and further proceedings cannot be continued against other family members who do not even reside with the couple.

He further urged that Section 188 Cr. P.C recognizes an offense that is committed outside India by a citizen of India, he would be dealt with as if such offense has been committed within India at which he may be found.

He laid stress on the proviso which tells that no such offense could be tried in India except with the previous sanction of the Central Government. On the other hand, the advocate appearing for the wife in counter refutes the submissions made by the advocate of the petitioners and contended that the trial can be continued against the husband even for the offenses that are alleged to have been committed outside India.

And insofar as other family members are concerned, the advocate further submitted that since the husband was instigated by frequent telephone calls of the family members to torture the wife, therefore they were made accused and it is a matter of trial in which they have to come out clean and this Court at this juncture, that too after the police had filed the charge sheet should not interfere.

In counter to the allegations made by the advocate of the petitioner, it was urged that part of the alleged offenses which were related to the Dowry Prohibition Act did appear to have arisen in India, even at the initial stage when various articles, including cash and jewelry, were given as dowry by the father of the wife.

It was submitted that since a part of the cause of action has arisen in India the learned Magistrate trying the said complaint could also try the other offenses which are alleged to have been committed outside India along with the offenses committed in India.

_______________________________________________

Referred cases – 498A quash Judgement 10.02.2022


1. Thota Venkateswarlu v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2. Nerella Chiranjeevi Arun Kumar v. State of Andhra Pradesh

3. Rajesh Sharma and Ors. V. State of Uttar Pradesh

4. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar

5. Preeti Gupta & Anr. V. State of Jharkhand

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

7. G.V. Rao vs. L.H.V. Prasad

8. K. Subba Rao v. The State of Telangana

9. Ajay Aggarwal vs. Union of India

________________________________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions_______________________________________________________________________

Court Opinion - 498A quash after chargesheet 10.02.2022

After knowing the above-mentioned facts and reading the complaint and submissions made by the respective advocates this court deems it appropriate to know that all the allegations made against the husband by the wife are of concerning torture meted out to her in the USA.

Even in the said summary of the charge sheet the entire narration or allegation is against the husband. Therefore, it is a case where the allegations are only against the husband and other members of the family are dragged into the web of criminal proceedings.

But allegations made even against the husband none of them has happened in India and all the allegations that are raised by the wife against the husband while registering the complaint happened outside India i.e.; in the USA. It is not that the husband cannot be prosecuted in India for the offenses that have been committed outside the country. It can be done only by following the procedure mentioned under section 188 Cr. P.C deals with the offenses committed outside India.

From the complaint made by the wife in the present case, it is clear that the case is related to alleged offenses under Section 498A & 506 IPC and had been committed outside India in Botswana, where the couple was residing. It may be said that the alleged offenses under Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act occurred within the territorial jurisdiction of Indian Criminal Courts and could, therefore, be tried by the Indian Courts without obtaining the previous sanction of the Central Government.

It may be stated that the provisions of IPC have been extended to the offenses committed by an Indian citizen in any place within or beyond India by virtue of Section 4 thereof. Accordingly, offenses committed in the USA by a citizen of India would be responsible to the provisions of the IPC, subject to the limitation imposed under the proviso of Section 188 Cr.P.C.

Therefore, upon consideration of the relevant circumstances and in the absence of any specific role attributed to the petitioners, it would be unjust if the petitioners are forced to go through the proceedings of a trial, i.e., general and omnibus allegations cannot manifest in a situation where the relatives of the wife's husband are forced to undergo trial.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Conclusion - 498A quash Judgement 10.02.2022

In this article, the Karnataka High Court has held that the allegations made against the petitioner’s in-laws are general and omnibus when the above-mentioned circumstances are considered as no specific role is alleged against the petitioners, it would be unfair for the petitioners to make them struggle through the difficulties of a trial.

Therefore, keeping in mind the above-mentioned facts and arguments, FIR against the petitioners under Section 498A IPC is quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

WhatsApp




    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment

0 comments:

Post a Comment