498A quash after chargesheet 16.03.2022 – Bombay High Court – General and absurd allegations made against the brother-in-law and his wife. FIR Quashed.

 498A quash after chargesheet 16.03.2022 – Bombay High Court – General and absurd allegations made against the brother-in-law and his wife. FIR Quashed.

498A quash after chargesheet 16.03.2022 – Bombay High Court – General and absurd allegations made against the brother-in-law and his wife. FIR Quashed.
498A quash after chargesheet 16.03.2022

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

Prashant Trimbakrao Helgire And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 16.03.2022

498A quash after chargesheet 16.03.2022 – In this article, the Bombay High Court has held that the allegations made against the brother-in-law, and his wife are general and absurd in nature. 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, the Bombay High Court has held that majorly the allegations are made against the husband, mother-in-law, and the father-in-law. And the petitioners are dragged into the criminal proceedings just to take vengeance. Therefore, the Bombay High Court has quashed the petition against all the petitioners.


Case Brief – 498A quash after chargesheet 16.03.2022

Though we find the names of the petitioners mentioned in the F.I.R. however, the allegations made against them are general in nature without quoting any specific incident, as such.

The wife got married to the husband who is also the co-accused in the case way back in the year 2003. It is alleged in the complaint that the wife was treated well for the initial years of the marriage.


However, after 2005, the wife was subjected to ill-treatment on account of non-fulfillment of dowry demand of Rs.2,00,000/- and the said ill-treatment continued till the year 2019.

_________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________


Arguments – 498A quash after chargesheet 16.03.2022

The advocate of the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners in the present case are the brother-in-law and his wife. Though the names of these petitioners are mentioned in the F.I.R., however, the allegations raised against them are general and absurd in nature.

He further submitted that the allegations have been made mainly against the husband, mother-in-law, and father-in-law and the present petitioners have been implicated in connection with the crime only because of the reason that they are the family members of the husband. It's a clear case of over-implication.

Advocate of the wife on the other hand submitted that the wife got married to the husband in the year 2003. Right from the date of marriage till 2019, the wife was subjected to ill-treatment on account of the non-fulfillment of certain dowry demands.

He further submitted that the allegations have been made against the petitioners and the husband. The wife was subjected to ill-treatment and was beaten on account of non-fulfillment of the said dowry demand of Rs.2,00,000/-. No substance is there in this criminal application and hence the same is liable to be dismissed.

_________________________________________________________________________

Read Latest Article- 498A quash judgement 10.03.2022 - Karnataka High court - Vague allegations made against the grandfather, mother-in-law, father-in-law and sister-in-law. FIR Quashed.

Read Latest Article- 498A quash judgement 11.03.2022 - Madhya Pradesh High court - Falsely implicated Omnibus allegations against entire family of the husband. FIR Quashed.


________________________________________________________________________


Referred Cases - 498A quash after chargesheet 16.03.2022


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


In this case, husband’s brother and unmarried sister approached the High Court for quashing off the proceedings initiated against them, on two grounds i.e.; lack of territorial jurisdiction and as no case was made out against them under Sections 498A, 323, 504, & 506 IPC including Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.


It is High courts’ legal duty to check whether there was any evidence against the petitioners so that they should undergo the trial, as there was the question of territorial jurisdiction. The High Court overlooked all the pleas that were raised against them and rejected the petition on the sole ground of territorial jurisdiction.


But as the contents of the FIR did not disclose any specific allegations against the petitioners except for the casual references of their names, it would be unfair to make them suffer through the criminal procedure.

Therefore, the court quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioners.


2. Neelu Chopra and others v. Bharti


The parents of the husband were too old. The husband had died and the main allegations were only against him. This Court found no cogent material against the other accused.


3. Taramani Parakh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

________________________________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions_______________________________________________________________________


Court Opinion - 498A quash after chargesheet 16.03.2022

In view of the above-mentioned facts and circumstances and in terms of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the above-mentioned cases, this court proceed to pass the order of dismissing the criminal application initiated against the petitioners accordingly.

After carefully considering the complaint and the chargesheet it is clear that if the allegations made against the petitioners are absurd in nature and do not make out any case, the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners are liable to be quashed.


In the present case, even if the allegations against these petitioners are held to be proved, no case is made out against them. In view of the same, the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners would be nothing but an abuse of the process of law.

_________________________________________________________________________________


Conclusion - 498A quash after chargesheet 16.03.2022

In this article, the Bombay High Court has held that the allegations made against the brother-in-law, and his wife are general and absurd in nature. The allegations made against the petitioners were made just to make them suffer through the criminal proceedings. Majorly the allegations were made against the husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law. Petitioners were just dragged in the criminal trial.

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


Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

WhatsApp




    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment

0 comments:

Post a Comment