498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court-Omnibus allegations against Sister and Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

 498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court-Omnibus allegations against Sister and Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022
498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022



498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022- In this article, Andhra Pradesh High Court held that allegations against the Sister and Brother-in-law are omnibus in nature and there is no specific act attributed against them. There is no material to connect the sister and brother-in-law to the crime, and there is no way that they would be involved in the day-to-day affairs of the wife and her husband. Therefore, criminal proceedings against the sister and brother-in-law are hereby quashed.

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________


Case Brief: 498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022


According to the facts mentioned in the report filed by the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized and registered the same in the office of Registrar, Mumbai on 31.08.2001 and the couple lead conjugal life in Mumbai for some years.


It is stated that later the wife went to her In-law’s house with her husband to Machilipatnam, where they again married on 20.02.2003 in the presence of family members as per their caste customs.


It is further stated that the wife and her husband stayed for a few years at the house of her parents-in-law, sister, and brother-in-law in Machilipatnam, and thereafter, they shifted to Visakhapatnam city in 2007.


Case Brief: 498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022


It is also stated that as marriage between the wife and her husband is a love marriage, the parents-in-law, sister, and brother-in-law did not accept the same heart-fully and started harassing the wife by abusing, beating, and demanding for additional dowry.


It is further stated by the wife, that her husband developed illicit intimacy with another woman in Visakhapatnam and when she questioned the same, her husband subjected her to cruelty by abusing, beating, and also demanding additional dowry. And her parents-in-law, sister, and brother-in-law supported her husband and neglected her in attending to her needs.


Upon this, the wife lodged a report and a case has been filed by Women Police station, Visakhapatnam for the offenses punishable under Section 498A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Protection Act, 1961 against parents-in-law, sister, and brother-in-law and after investigation chargesheet was filed against them.

_________________________________________________

Arguments: 498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022


The advocate appearing on behalf of parents-in-law, sister and brother-in-law submitted that the marriage between the wife and her husband was dissolved by way of a decree of divorce on 28.11.2011, but she did not mention the same in the report given by her to the police.


He also submitted that the omnibus allegations have been leveled against his parents-in-law, sister, and brother-in-law, that they harassed her, and except the same, there is no other material to connect them with the alleged offenses.


He further submitted that his sister-in-law is a resident of a different city, and she is a married woman and his brother-in-law is a software engineer working in Japan. Except for visiting his parents, whenever he visited India, there is no other material to connect him to the subject of crime.


Arguments: 498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022


Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of criminal proceedings and F.I.R filed by the wife against her parents-in-law, sister, and brother-in-law.


On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife contended that the husband had given the wrong address to the wife and obtained the ex parte divorce decree dated 28.11.2011.


He also submitted that prior to 28.11.2011 and after the said date, both the wife and her husband were living together under the same roof. And even after the alleged decree of divorce dated 28.11.2011, they traveled together.


Arguments: 498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022


Further, he stated that the wife and her husband visited IVF Clinic at Visakhapatnam for fertility treatment on 08.03.2013, and they both actively took participation in the marriage of the cousin of the husband but at no point of time, the husband or any In-law informed the wife about the decree of divorce.


He also stated that the wife transferred a huge amount on 14.12.2011 to the account of her husband on his demand, from the streedhana amount.


Therefore, he prayed to dismiss the criminal petition, and parents-in-law, sister, and brother-in-law should face the trial and there is no question of quashing F.I.R against them.

_________________________________________________

Referred Judgements: 498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022

  • State of Haryana Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors
  • Mirza Iqbal @ Golu and another Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another

Court’s Opinion: 498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022


In this case, the contents of the report and circumstances show that there is ambiguity whether the parents-in-law of the wife had knowledge of the passing of the decree of divorce against her at the instance of her husband.


It is stated that at this stage, the court would not be in a position to come to conclusion about whether parents-in-law have knowledge of the passing of the decree of divorce or not, and it is only during the course of the trial, it can be established whether parents-in-law had knowledge of the said fact or not.


It is also stated that as far as the sister and brother-in-law are concerned, the only allegation against them is omnibus in nature, and except for stating that they too instigated the husband to harass the wife, there is absolutely no other material to connect them to the crime.


Court’s Opinion: 498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022


It is further stated that it is essential that specific acts have to be attributed in respect of the In-laws of the wife and on a perusal of F.I.R, statements under Section 161Cr. P. C and the chargesheet allegations, there is absolutely no material as against the sister and brother-in-law are concerned.


It was also stated that the sister-in-law is a married woman and lives in a different city and except for an accusation, which is omnibus in nature, there is no specific act attributed against the sister-in-law.


Further, it is stated that the brother-in-law, lives in Japan and except for visiting his parents, whenever he visited India, there is no other material to him on the subject of crime. Except for the omnibus accusation that he, along with the sister-in-law, instigated the husband to harass the wife, there is no specific act attributed as against him.


Court’s Opinion: 498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022


In view of the above discussion, the court held that the sister and brother-in-law would not be aware of the fact that the husband obtained a decree of divorce against the wife behind her back, and in no way, they would be involved in the day-to-day affairs of the wife and her husband.


Therefore, the criminal petition is partly allowed and the criminal proceedings and F.I.R registered by police for the offenses punishable under Section 498A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Protection Act against the sister and brother-in-law are hereby quashed.


However, the presence of parents-in-law is dispensed with, before the trial court, except on those occasions when the Magistrate feels their presence is necessary.

_________________________________________________


In this article, Andhra Pradesh High Court held that omnibus allegations have been leveled against the sister and brother-in-law, there is absolutely no material to connect them to the alleged crime and no specific act is attributed against them.


It was also held that In no way the sister and brother-in-law would be involved in the day-to-day affairs of the wife and her husband, and they would not be aware of the fact that the husband obtained a decree of divorce against the wife behind her back.


Therefore, F.I.R against the petitioners is hereby quashed.



Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

WhatsApp




    Blogger Comment
    Facebook Comment

0 comments:

Post a Comment