498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023- Jammu and Kashmir High Court – No Specific Allegation against the Mother-in-law, FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023- In this article, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that there are no specific allegations against the mother-in-law, and nothing on record shows that she has subjected the wife to cruelty and harassment. In the absence of any specific allegations against the mother-in-law which disclose her active involvement, the magistrate has taken cognizance in a mechanical and routine manner against her. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the mother-in-law are hereby quashed.
Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
According to the facts mentioned in the case, the marriage of the wife was arranged with the husband who had come from Canada to India to meet his parents, and the Roka ceremony between the wife and the husband took place on 19.06.2003.
It is stated that the husband started delaying the marriage on one or the other pretext and was insisting on performing a simple court marriage, and when the husband again came to India, the engagement or ring ceremony was solemnized on 04.11.2004.
It is also stated that the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 06.11.2004 in Jammu, and the marriage was registered with the Registrar of marriages, Jammu on 08.11.2004.
Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
It is further stated that after one week of the marriage, the husband left for Canada on 12.11.2004, and left the wife to stay behind for three months in Jammu during this period, the wife was appointed in a dental hospital and remained there till the completion of her visa formalities to go to Canada, and on 14.02.2005, the visa of the wife was approved for the USA, and she went to San Francisco.
It is also stated that the husband and the wife came to India on 18.01.2006 and 26.01.2006 respectively to attend the marriage of the wife’s brother which was scheduled on 02.02.2006, and after that, both husband and wife again left for the USA on 25.02.2006.
Later, the father of the wife lodged a complaint at the Police Station, Jammu on 15.06.2006, and on the said complaint an FIR was registered at the Women Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu for the offense punishable under Sections 498A, 109, 504, 506 of RPC against the mother-in-law of the wife.
Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
Upon this, a divorce petition was filed by the husband for dissolution of marriage with the wife in the court of San Francisco County Superior Court, USA, and the court passed the judgement and dissolved the marriage between the husband and the wife on 27.12.2006, and ordered the husband to pay 6000 dollars to the wife in two installments of 2000 and 4000, and the husband paid the amount in compliance to the court order.
On the basis of the said divorce judgement, the wife filed a suit for the declaration of the fact that the wife’s marriage with the husband stands dissolved by the virtue of judgement dated 27.12.2006 passed by the San Francisco County Superior Court, USA, with relief of permanent injunction restraining the husband and parents-in-law from creating obstacles in getting the name of the husband deleted from the record of the Register of Marriages and from the record of Passport Office, Jammu.
Later, on 03.11.2006, the wife filed a suit against the husband, mother-in-law, and a Branch Manager of a Cooperative Bank claiming that the jewelry lying in the bank is her property, and in this suit, a preliminary was passed, and a commissioner was appointed and was directed to get the property identified from the parties and hand over the items to the parties according to their belonging, and after the submission of report by the commissioner, a final decree was passed on 28.03.2007, and the husband and mother-in-law never raised any dispute regarding the property of the wife.
Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
After the investigation, a trial was started against the mother-in-law, and the Magistrate by its order dated 10.11.2008 directed the investigating officer to perform a re-investigation of the case, and submit the report on 15.12.2008, but instead of submitting the report, the investigating officer produced a challan dated 19.03.2009 against the mother-in-law.
The challan dated 19.03.2009 against the husband and mother-in-law is pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, and warrants under Section 512 of CrPC were issued against the husband, and the mother-in-law is facing the trial.
Upon this, the mother-in-law has filed the present petition under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing the impugned FIR, and the challan dated 19.03.2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, against her.
_________________________________________________
Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
The advocate appearing on behalf of the mother-in-law submitted that the allegations leveled against the mother-in-law are totally malicious and baseless, and do not disclose any offense against them.
It is also submitted that the allegations made in the FIR, even if they are taken on their face value and accepted in entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offense or make out any case against the mother-in-law, and despite such facts, the mother-in-law has been harassed by the father of the wife by lodging the impugned FIR, who has now expired.
It is further submitted that the wife's father abused the process of law, only to wreak vengeance upon the mother-in-law, and to victimize her, stated the fact about the father-in-law's death, and explained the bedridden situation of the mother-in-law due to illness.
Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
Therefore, he prayed for quashing the impugned FIR, and the challan dated 19.03.2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, against the mother-in-law.
On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the Women Police Station opposed the petition filed by the mother-in-law and submitted that the present petition is not maintainable as it involves factual disputes which can only be decided by leading evidence and requires a full trial by the trial court.
It is also submitted that the father of the wife filed a written complaint for registration of FIR against the mother-in-law, and after receipt thereof, the women police station registered a case vide FIR for the commission of offenses punishable under Sections 498A, 109, 504, 506 of RPC.
Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
It is further submitted that during the investigation, a prima facie case has been made out against the mother-in-law, and so she has no legal right to seek quashing of the challan dated 19.03.2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate.
Therefore, it is prayed that the present petition filed by the mother-in-law shall be dismissed.
_________________________________________________
_____________________________________
Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
- Mirza Iqbal @ Golu & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. and Anr.
- Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Ors.
- Veena Mittal Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
- State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
It is stated by the court that the power under Section 482 of CrPC is exercised by the High Courts to prevent the abuse of the process of court and to secure the ends of justice, and this authority of the court exists for the advancement of justice, and if any attempt is made to abuse this authority, the court has the power to prevent such abuse. The inherent powers of the High Court are wide in scope, power, and higher the responsibility upon the authority having such power to exercise it with circumspection.
The court also stated that the advocate appearing on behalf of the mother-in-law restricted his arguments only to the legal issue that in the absence of any specific allegations against the mother-in-law which discloses her active involvement, the magistrate has taken cognizance in the mechanical and routine manner.
By referring to one of the above-mentioned cases, it is further stated by the court that allowing the prosecution, in the absence of any clear allegations against the In-laws will simply result in abuse of the process of the court.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
It has also been held in another one of the above-mentioned cases that at the time of filing of the complaint the allegations and consequences are not properly seen by the person filing the complaint that such a complaint can lead to a huge amount of agony, harassment, and pain to the person who filed the complaint, accused, and their close relations.
Furthermore, it is stated by the court that in a case where allegations made in the complaint, and the evidence collected in support of the complaint do not disclose the commission of any offense or make out a case against the accused person, the High Court has power under Section 482 of CrPC to quash the proceedings and the case against the accused.
The court also stated that upon perusal of the complaint in the present case, it can be seen that there are no specific allegations mentioned in the complaint against the mother-in-law, and according to the court, there is no ground to constitute an offense against the mother-in-law of subjecting the wife to cruelty, and most of the allegations in the complaint are directed by the wife against the husband with regard to dowry demand, and subjecting her to cruelty and harassment by having extramarital affair with another woman abroad.
In view of the above discussion, the petition is allowed, the impugned FIR and the challan dated 19.03.2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Jammu against the mother-in-law is hereby quashed.
_________________________________________________
Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023
In this article, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that in the absence of any specific allegations against the mother-in-law which disclose her active involvement, the magistrate has taken cognizance in the mechanical and routine manner.
It is also held that there are no specific allegations against the mother-in-law, and there is nothing that shows that the mother-in-law has subjected the wife to cruelty and harassment.
Therefore, the impugned FIR and the challan dated 19.03.2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Jammu against the mother-in-law is hereby quashed.
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment