498A quash Judgement 25.02.2022 - Gujarat High Court – General allegations made against the married sister-in-law and other family members. FIR Quashed.
 |
| 498A quash Judgement 25.02.2022 |
Read More Judgements on 498a Quash
Alka Jogesh Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 25.02.2022
498A quash after chargesheet 15.02.2022 – In this article, the Gujarat High court has held that the allegations made against the married sister-in-law are general in nature without quoting any specific incident against her. Further, the Gujarat High court has held that it is clearly stated in the FIR that at the time of the marriage of the wife the sister-in-law was already married and she was residing in USA at her matrimonial home. And the allegations made against the other family members of the husband are made just to make them suffer through the criminal trial. Therefore, the Gujarat High court quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners.
Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights
Case Brief – 498A quash Judgement 25.02.2022
The marriage
of the wife and the husband was solemnized in the year 2005 as per the rites
and customs of their religion. After the marriage, the
wife started to reside at her matrimonial home along with her in-laws.
It is alleged that the allegations made against the married sister-in-law
in the FIR who used to visit the matrimonial home of the wife intentionally
made the wife do all the household work and also used to quarrel with the wife very
frequently.
Further, the allegations made against the sister-in-law were that after
the birth of a son to the wife, the husband of the wife pressurized the wife to
hand over the son of the wife to the sister-in-law by way of adoption. The
complaint basically lists out all these allegations against the sister-in-law.
In so far as the allegations against other family members are concerned the allegations relate to the husband as well as the in-laws seeking dowry from the wife and her family members.
_________________________________________________________________________
Read Latest Article- 498A quash judgement 15.02.2022 - Karnataka High court - Bald and Omnibus allegations made against the husband's entire family. FIR Quashed.
BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH
Arguments – 498A quash Judgement 25.02.2022
Thereafter, the advocate submitted that the marriage of the husband and the wife was solemnized in the year 2005 and whereas the allegations raised even if they are believed to be true, are related to a period between the year 2005-2007 and even in the FIR the wife has clearly stated that she herein was married and residing at her matrimonial home.
The advocate appearing for the petitioners argued and submitted that the allegations made against the petitioners
are general allegations of harassment against the wife made in the complaint.
He further submitted that a
bare reading of the complaint would reveal that the allegations mentioned in
the complaint are of a period prior to the year 2007 whereas the FIR was filed
approximately after a period of 11 years.
Additionally, he submitted that as far as the married sister-in-law was
concerned, she was residing outside the country, and even in the FIR which is
filed by the Investigating Officer somewhere in the year 2020, it is clearly
mentioned that the married sister-in-law was residing in San Francisco, United
States.
He submitted that upon coming back of the married sister-in-law to India, she had been arrested and one of the conditions of the arrest of the release of bail was to deposit her passport and whereas since the entire family of the sister-in-law is residing in the United States, therefore, the request for taking up the present application urgently, more particularly, since the sister-in-law wants to return back to the United States.
He would submit that there being a lack of any specific allegations of having committed any overt act made against the sister-in-law and furthermore the allegations relating to a period which was prior to 11 years before the filing of the complaint this Court may interfere with the impugned FIR.
He would also rely upon the recent decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of:
Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and Others v State of Bihar and Others where the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that the aspect of over implication of family members by the wife just with a view to making them suffer on account of the grudge by the wife against the other family members of the husband. He relying upon the said decision would submit that this Court may quash the impugned complaint.
On the other hand, the advocate of the wife argued and submitted in her counter that very severe allegations have been made against the petitioner in the FIR.
According to her advocate the wife had filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights before the Family Court and vide an order dated 31.07.2017, the Family Court has directed the husband of the wife to allow the wife to live with him and whereas when the wife in compliance of such order had gone to her matrimonial home, the in-laws of the wife did not allow the wife to enter the home.
She further submitted that since the application for restitution of
conjugal rights was still pending, therefore, not to disturb the possible
chance of re-approachment that the applicant had not preferred the FIR at the
relevant point of time.
She would further submit that the impugned FIR has culminated into a criminal trial and according to her pendency of the trial, this Court may not exercise jurisdiction in favor of the applicant, and pendency of the trial the FIR may not be quashed.
Advocate for the state submitted that while allegations made against the
petitioners are serious in nature, more particularly, in view of the fact that
there is a delay in filing the complaint this Court may pass appropriate orders.
Referred cases – 498A quash Judgement 25.02.2022
1. Taramani Parakh V. State of Madhya Pradesh
2. Rakhi Mishra V. State of Bihar
3. Rajesh Sharma and Ors. V. State of Uttar Pradesh
4.
5. State of Haryana and others V. Bhajan Lal
________________________________________________________________________
Court
Opinion - 498A quash Judgement
25.02.2022
In light of the facts of
this case, this Court is of the view that even at the time of the filing of the
complaint, more specifically, referring to the allegations made against the sister-in-law,
the wife herself has mentioned that the sister-in-law at that relevant point of
time was married and was residing at her matrimonial home outside the area of
residence of the wife.
It is also observed that the
allegations made against the sister-in-law are absolutely general in nature and
whereas it also appears that the fact of an allegation that the son of the wife
was sought to be given to the married sister-in-law for adoption, the major allegation
is against the husband for pressurizing the wife.
Therefore, in the opinion of
this Court, in the present case, there is an absence of prima facie material or
allegation in the FIR which would convince the Court to allow the trial against
the married sister-in-law to continue.
Furthermore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner is a married sister-in-law at the time of marriage of the wife, which indicates she appears to have been roped in just with a view to spite family members of the husband. Furthermore, this Court also notes that the allegations relate to a period prior to August 2007, whereas the complaint is filed in the month of July 2018 i.e.; after approximately 11 years.
In the light of the facts obtained in the present case and the judgment
of this court deems it appropriate to allow these criminal petitions and
obliterate criminal proceedings against the petitioners.
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
Conclusion - 498A quash Judgement 25.02.2022
In this article, the Gujarat High Court has held that the allegations made against the married sister-in-law are general in nature as the sister-in-law was not even residing with the wife at the time of marriage.
And as far as the allegations are concerned the other family members of the husband are made just to rope them in
the criminal proceedings with the intention of defaming the family.
Considering
the above facts, it wouldn’t be fair for the petitioners to make them suffer
the difficulties of a trial. Therefore,
FIR against the petitioners is quashed.
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment