498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- In this article, Himachal Pradesh High Court held that according to the available facts it can be clearly inferred that the allegations levelled against the brother-in-law are general, vague and omnibus in nature and no specific instance with approximate date or time has been alleged against the brother-in-law. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the FIR against the brother-in-law is an abuse of the process of law. Therefore, the Criminal Proceedings against the brother-in-law are hereby quashed.
Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022
According to the facts mentioned in the F.I.R. filed by the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 06.07.2018 after the marriage, the wife started to cohabit with her husband and parents-in-law at her matrimonial home.
It is stated that soon after marriage, the wife has been continuously harassed and shunted out of the house for bringing less dowry and wrongful demands were made to her by her husband, brother-in-law and other In-laws.
It is also stated that the wife was subjected to harassment by her husband and In-laws and suffered from mental torture. Later, the wife left her matrimonial home and took shelter in her parents' house at Solan.
Upon this, the wife filed the complaint dated 28.12.2019 and F.I.R dated 05.01.2020 was registered at Women Police Station, Solan under Section 498A read with Section 34 of IPC against her Brother-in-law and other In-laws.
____________________________________________
Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022
The Advocate appearing on behalf of the Brother-in-law submitted that the brother-in-law is working and residing in the United States of America (USA) and he had visited India for a few days only to attend the marriage of the wife and her husband who was solemnized on 06.07.2018. And on the date of marriage, except for the exchange of pleasantries, the brother-in-law had no occasion to interact with the wife.
It is also submitted that the brother-in-law had stayed in Hyderabad between 13.07.2018 to 27.07.2018 and during this period he had only formal interaction with the wife as he had stayed at the husband’s house and thereafter he left for the USA on 29.07.2018 and after that, he has never visited India.
It is further submitted that the wife has levelled allegations against the brother-in-law which are general and vague. The omnibus allegations against the brother-in-law have no basis and except for the bald allegations levelled by the wife against the brother-in-law, no evidence has been found against him to date.
Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022
Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of the F.I.R. and the criminal proceeding against the brother-in-law.
On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the written complaint was received by the Women Police Station, Solan on 30.12.2019 and the complaint contained allegations of harassment of the wife at the hands of her husband, parents-in-law and brother-in-law.
It is also submitted that later FIR was registered on 05.01.2020 and Investigation is stated to be underway. It is alleged that despite various efforts, the investigation agency has not been able to associate the brother-in-law and other In-laws with the Investigation.
Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022
The advocate appearing on the wife's behalf submitted that the FIR was registered after thoroughly examining the written complaint and recording her statement. The brother-in-law and other In-laws in the FIR have not joined the Investigation, and the petition is alleged to be an abuse of the process of law, and the wife has placed reliance on the allegations levelled by her in the complaint and consequent FIR.
It is further submitted that the wife has admitted that the brother-in-law had left India for the USA on 29.08.2018. And as per the wife, the brother-in-law is intentionally and deliberately avoiding the joining investigation, and the instant petition is also a step in such direction.
Therefore, it was prayed that there is no sufficient reason to quash the proceedings against the brother-in-law of the wife.
_________________________________________________
_______________________________
Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022
- Dineshbhai Chandubhai Pate Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors.
- State of West Bengal & Ors. Vs. Swapan Kumar Guha & Ors.
- Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & Another
- K. Subha Rao and Others Vs. State of Telangana
- State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal
- Kans Raj Vs. State of Punjab & Ors.
- Kailash Chandra Agrawal and Another Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Others
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022
It is stated that the court is vested with jurisdiction and powers under Section 482 of Cr. P. C. to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, but the same has to be used sparingly and only in appropriate cases.
It is a well-defined principle that some part of the FIR in question is bad in law because it does not disclose any cognizable offense against any of the accused persons, whereas only a part of the FIR is good which discloses a prima facie case against the accused persons and hence it needs further investigation to that extent in accordance with the law.
The Supreme Court by way of its judgements has warned the courts from proceeding against the relatives and In-laws of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against them.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022
In the present case, the court stated that more than two years have elapsed since the registration of FIR and there is nothing on record to suggest that the investigation agency has found any other evidence against the brother-in-law except the allegations levelled against him in the complaint.
It is also stated that on analysis of the available facts at the touchstone of the above-noticed exposition of the law, it can be clearly inferred that the allegations levelled against the brother-in-law are general, vague and omnibus in nature and no specific instance with approximate date or time has been alleged against the brother-in-law.
In view of the above discussion, the court held that in the view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the FIR dated 05.01.2020 registered at Women Police Station, Solan under Section 498A read with Section 34 of IPC is an abuse of process of law against the brother-in-law.
Therefore, the petition is allowed and the F.I.R. registered at Women Police Station, Solan under Section 498A read with Section 34 of IPC against the Brother-in-law is hereby quashed.
_________________________________________________
Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022
In this article, the Himachal Pradesh High Court held that more than two years have elapsed since the registration of the FIR, and there is nothing on record to suggest that the investigation agency has found any other evidence against the brother-in-law except the allegations levelled against him in the complaint.
It is also held that according to the available facts it can be clearly inferred that the allegations levelled against the brother-in-law are general, vague and omnibus in nature and no specific instance with approximate date or time has been alleged against the brother-in-law.
Therefore, the F.I.R. against the petitioner is hereby quashed.
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment