498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022 – Gujarat High Court – Baseless allegations made against the parents-in-law, married sister-in-law, and her husband. FIR Quashed.
 |
| 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022 |
Read More Judgements on 498a Quash
Vijaybhai Shankarbhai Raval vs State Of Gujarat on 31.03.2022
498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022 – In this article, the Gujarat High Court has held that the allegations made against the petitioners are baseless and vague in nature. As it is clear from reading the chargesheet that majorly the disputes were between the husband and the wife. It was further held by the Gujarat High court that the allegations made against the petitioners are made without quoting any specific incident which would attract the provisions of section 498A IPC. Therefore, the Gujarat High Court has quashed the petition against all the petitioners.
Case Brief – 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022
The petitioners in the present
case are the mother-in-law and father-in-law, the married sister-in-law, and her husband.
The marriage of the husband and the wife were solemnized on 31.07.2008 in
accordance of their rites and customs in presence of the petitioners. The husband
and the wife were studying together and whereas, and they had a love affair.
It is alleged that in the initial years of marriage, the wife was treated
properly by the petitioners. The wife’s late mother-in-law's demise created new
problems for the wife. After the demise of her late mother-in-law, the petitioners
herein started creating problems for the wife, more particularly on the account
of the caste of the wife.
It appears that the wife had left the matrimonial home approximately a
year before the filing of this impugned FIR. And whereas the allegations were being
that while the wife was working in a private firm, the petitioners herein would
stop the wife on her way to the office and would abuse her, more particularly in
relation to the caste of the wife.
It is further alleged that on 02.04.2011 the wife and her husband had gone to live with her in-laws and whereas even at that time, the wife and her husband were thrown out of the house belonging to the father-in-law herein, which led to the filing of the impugned FIR.
_________________________________________________________________________
Read Latest Article- 498A quash judgement 28.03.2022 - Karnataka High court - Vague Statements made against the married sister-in-law, her husband, her father-in-law, and her relatives. FIR Quashed.
Read Latest Article- 498A quash judgement by Gujarat High court- Omnibus allegations made against three married sisters-in-law & brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
Read Latest Article- 498A quash judgement 28.03.2022 - Karnataka High court - General and Omnibus allegations made against the relatives of the husband. FIR Quashed.
BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH
Arguments – 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022
The advocate for the petitioner submitted that as such the married sister-in-law and her husband are residing in a separate place other than the matrimonial home of the wife, hence, they do not have any role to play, even if the allegations are believed to be true, yet they have been arraigned just to pressurize the other accused.
He further submitted that this is a clear case of over-implication so far as the married sister-in-law and her husband are concerned.
He also submitted that as far as the allegations under the Atrocities Act are concerned, the allegations appear to be unbelievable, more particularly according to him, if the applicants herein had any problem with regard to the caste of the wife, then they would have raised an objection to the marriage itself but whereas the wife herself has stated in the complaint that the petitioners were present at the time of marriage and she has also stated that she was treated properly by the petitioners in the initial few years of the marriage.
Arguments – 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022
Additionally, he submitted that under such circumstances, the allegations leveled under the Atrocities Act clearly appear to be a case of abuse of the process of law. He further submitted that as such the dispute is between the husband and the wife herself and even the petitioners herein, more particularly father-in-law herein is not having good terms with his son i.e. the husband of the wife.
He further draw the attention of this Court to a public notice issued by the father-in-law, which had appeared in a Vernacular newspaper "Sandhesh" on 01.07.2008, wherein it was mentioned that the father-in-law and his son i.e.; the husband of the wife were staying separately and the father-in-law does not have any relation with his son and he had absolved himself from any liability with regard to any transaction that might be entered into by his son i.e.; the husband of the wife.
Arguments – 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022
The advocate also mentioned that this public notice has been issued much prior to the filing of this complaint in question and whereas the fact that the husband and the father-in-law weren’t having good relationship, appears to have been supported by the wife herself, more particularly when the wife herself mentions in the complaint that on 02.04.2011 she along with her husband had gone to reside at her in-laws' place.
He further submitted that while the petitioners more particularly the father-in-law and the mother-in-law do not have any relation with the husband of the wife, and whereas the wife and her husband are having problems inter se the impugned FIR is filed just to harass the petitioners on account of the disputes between the husband and wife. Therefore, the advocate has submitted that the impugned FIR may be quashed and set aside by this Court.
Arguments – 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022
On the other hand, the opposition advocate submitted that it is a matter of trial for the petitioners to come out clean as there are allegations that would attract the offences punishable under Section 498A IPC.
This application is strongly opposed by the advocate appearing on behalf of the original wife. He submitted that the entire issue between the petitioners and the wife had occurred on account of the caste of the wife.
He also submitted that while the late mother-in-law of the wife was alive, the wife was treated properly. Thereafter, it appears that the father-in-law had decided to get married with mother-in-law herein and after such marriage, the caste of the wife became a problem. The advocate, therefore, submitted that since serious allegations have been alleged in the FIR, this Court may not interfere.
The advocate for the State submitted that as far as the allegations under Section 498A are concerned, the allegations are general in nature. He further submitted that while serious allegations are leveled as far as the offence is punishable under the Atrocities Act is concerned, the fact that the petitioners were present at the time of marriage and the petitioners had treated the wife properly for a few years are facts that may be appropriately considered by this Court.
_______________________________________________________
Read 10 Tips to Counter Claim of Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. when life leaves the husband without any reasonable cause and maintenance can be denied.
__________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
Read 10 Tips to Counter Claim of Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. when life leaves the husband without any reasonable cause and maintenance can be denied.
Referred cases – 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022
1. State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________
Court Opinion - 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022
It
appears that as far as the allegations under the Atrocities are concerned, to
this Court all the allegations appear to be absolutely baseless. From the
narration of the complaint itself, it appears that the mother-in-law, as well
as the other petitioners, were present at the time of the marriage between the wife
and her husband.
It
also appears that the wife had been treated properly for a few years by the petitioners
herein. In the considered opinion of this Court, if the petitioners had any
problem with the caste of the wife, then the disputes would have been started
from day one or even at the stage of marriage.
If
the marriage had been accepted by the petitioners and if the wife had resided
without any problems with the petitioners for a few years then the allegations
of having abused the complainant on account of her caste appear to this Court
as being absurd.
Insofar
as the married sister-in-law and husband of the sister-in-law are concerned,
this Court is inclined to accept the submissions of the learned Advocate on
behalf of the petitioners that this is a case of over-implication of the said petitioners.
Court Opinion - 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022
This Court has also considered
the fact that there appears to be some disputes between the parents-in-law and
the husband, more particularly the father-in-law having been issued a public
notice back in 2008, wherein he had clearly stated that he doesn’t have any
relation with his son and whereas he would not be responsible for any acts,
which would be committed by his son.
The said advertisement being
at least three years prior to the filing of the present complaint, the
allegation that the husband and the wife were residing together with the petitioners
also does not appear to be true and correct.
This fact also has to be read in the context of the allegations specifically having made by the complainant that on 02.04.2011 she had gone along with her husband to reside at the house of the applicant No.1. This allegation also supports the contention on behalf of the petitioners that there were some disputes between the husband and the wife and father-in-law. Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, in the considered opinion of this Court, the impugned FIR appears to be a clear abuse of the process of law.
Court Opinion - 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022
It appears that, as noted by this Court in the discussion in the judgment of the same day in Criminal Misc. Application, that there were disputes between the wife and her husband and whereas in the FIR allegations has been made against the applicants herein, in the prima facie opinion of this Court, just to pressurize the petitioners, who happen to be the parents of the husband of the wife.
The exhaustive list of points was explained in the landmark judgment of the Bhajanlal case from which light can be laid on the 2 below-mentioned points as in the court's opinion these two points would cover the present case resulting in the allegations being absurd and the FIR being maliciously instituted:
1. Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is reasonable ground for initiating proceeding against the accused.
2. Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to avenge him due to a personal grudge.
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
_________________________________________
Conclusion - 498A quash after chargesheet 31.03.2022
In this article, the Gujarat High Court has held that the allegations made
against the petitioners i.e.; parents-in-law, married sister-in-law, and her husband are baseless and vague in nature, without quoting any
specific allegations against any of them. The allegations made against them
were made just to make them suffer through the criminal proceedings.
In view of the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, in the absence of any specific allegations made against the petitioners, the Gujarat High court quashed the petition against the petitioners.
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment