498A quash after chargesheet 14.03.2022 – Karnataka High Court – Bald statements made against the sister-in-law and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

 498A quash after chargesheet 14.03.2022 – Karnataka High Court – Bald statements made against the sister-in-law and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

498A quash after chargesheet 14.03.2022 – Karnataka High Court – Bald statements made against the sister-in-law and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
498A quash after chargesheet 14.03.2022

Sri Purushotham vs State on 14.03.2022

498A quash after chargesheet 14.03.2022 – In this article, the Karnataka High Court has held that the allegations made against the brother-in-law, and sister-in-law are nothing more than the bald statements. As it is clear from reading the complaint that the allegations made against the petitioners are made without quoting any specific incident which would attract the provisions of section 498A IPC. Further, Karnataka High Court has held that the relationship was stringent between the husband and the wife but the husband is not before the High court. Therefore, the Karnataka High Court has quashed the petition against all the petitioners.


Case Brief – 498A quash after chargesheet 14.03.2022

The wife and the husband got married on 06.08.2012 as per the rites and customs of their religion. Everything was running smoothly between the couple in the initial years of the marriage.

After a period of three years approximately, their relationship got strained, and a complaint was registered on 01.12.2015 by the wife before the jurisdictional police alleging offences punishable under Section 498A and 34 IPC.

The complaint is against several accused, two of whom are before this court. Hence, chargesheet has been filed against the petitioners after the investigation is done by the police. It is at this point, that the petitioners have come before the court in the subject petition.

The husband is not before this court. But the petitioners in the case in hand are the brother-in-law and the sister-in-law of the wife.

_________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

Arguments – 498A quash after chargesheet 14.03.2022


The advocate of the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners who are the brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the wife who are considered as accused in the present case have no role to play in the lives of the couple i.e.; the husband and the wife.

Many times, no representation was made on behalf of the petitioners if dates were mentioned i.e.; on 01.09.2021, 29.09.2021, and on 28.02.2022, thus the court had directed the listing of the matter as a last chance awaiting the appearance of the advocate. Therefore, counsel for the petitioners is heard.

He further submitted that the brother-in-law who was working in Gujarat and in Mumbai before that and now presently is residing in Bangalore. And the sister-in-law resides with the brother-in-law in Bangalore. The husband and the wife were residing at different location.


Therefore, there is no direct contact between the couple and the petitioners herein. Therefore, he contended that the petitioners are simply dragged into the criminal proceedings without there being any specific reason.

_________________________________________________________________________

Read Latest Article- 498A quash judgement 25.02.2022 - Telangana High court - No specific allegation alleged against the husbands' relatives. FIR Quashed.


________________________________________________________________________


Referred Cases - 498A quash after chargesheet 14.03.2022.

1. Rajesh Sharma and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh
2. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar
3. 
Preeti Gupta & Anr. V. State of Jharkhand
4. Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and Others v State of Bihar and Others
5. Geeta Mehrotra and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh
6. G.V. Rao v. L.H.V. Prasad
7. K. Subba Rao v. The State of Telangana

________________________________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions_______________________________________________________________________


Court Opinion - 498A quash after chargesheet 14.03.2022

A perusal of the complaint supra would indicate no allegation against the petitioners. Except for bald statement that all of them together have tortured the wife, the allegations are against the husband and other accused. Insofar as the petitioners are concerned, there are no allegations of any overt acts that would touch upon the offences under Section 498A or 34 IPC or the offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act. 


Even in the findings of the investigation, as found in the summary of the charge sheet, there is one statement at the end that all of them have together tortured the wife complainant. Except for this statement, there is no other statement even in the charge sheet.

Therefore, in the light of the above-mentioned facts and circumstances not making out any offences, as well as the chargesheet not indicating any offences against the petitioners, this court deems it appropriate to obliterate all further proceedings against the petitioners of the offences punishable under Section 498A, 34 IPC and sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, to prevent miscarriage of justice.

_________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

Conclusion - 498A quash after chargesheet 14.03.2022

In this article, the Karnataka High Court has held that the allegations made against the brother-in-law, and the sister-in-law are nothing more than bald statements made against them. The allegations were made against the petitioners who were not even residing with the wife at her matrimonial home, and they were made just to drag them into the criminal trial.

In view of the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, in the absence of any specific allegations raised against the petitioners, the Karnataka High court has quashed the petition against all the petitioners.



Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights


WhatsApp




    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment

0 comments:

Post a Comment