498A Discharge Judgment 01.03.2023- Mere allegation of torture or dowry demand do not constitute offense against Husband & Five In-laws, Case Quashed.
 |
| 498A Discharge Judgment 01.03.2023 GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS |
498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023- In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that mere allegation of demand of dowry, and further torture upon the wife for non-fulfillment of dowry demand would not constitute an offense under Section 498A of IPC unless it is shown prima facie that such unlawful demand or cruelty has pushed the wife to her limits, and the complaint filed by the wife does not constitute a strong prima facie case against the husband and In-laws. The complaint filed by the wife is a result of only a concoction and afterthought of the plan of action, the wife has emerged to fulfill personal vengeance against the husband and In-laws, and the criminal proceedings against them appear to be a gross abuse of the process of the court, and it is not free from the malice. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the Husband and Five In-laws are hereby quashed.
Case Brief- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
According to the facts mentioned in the complaint filed by the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 23.11.2005 and after the marriage, the wife started living in her matrimonial home with her husband and In-laws.
It is stated that the wife has been subjected to immense mental torture by her husband and in-laws and her husband started living separately from her in some other place and left the newly wedded wife to stay alone amongst the In-laws.
It is also stated that the In-laws including the wife’s married sister-in-law demanded money from the wife, pressurized her, and subjected her to abusive language and humiliation so that the wife brings the money from her parents, as well as the husband inflicted torture on the wife on demand of more dowry.
Case Brief- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
It is further stated that at the time of the marriage, the husband and In-laws were provided the dowry in form of various valuable gifts and a huge amount of cash by the parents of the wife, and the father of the wife gifted the wife various valuable properties as her stridhan properties, and the husband and In-laws have deprived the wife of the enjoyment of the said properties.
Furthermore, it is stated that the stridhan properties of the wife of which only she is the lawful owner have not been returned to her by the husband and In-laws, and due to the severe torture and unbearable situation created by the husband and In-laws in the matrimonial home, the wife was forced to leave her matrimonial home, and from the month of July 2006 she has been virtually living separately from her husband and In-laws.
Upon this, the wife filed a complaint case dated 29.08.2015 in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan for the offense punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 506, and 34 of IPC against the husband and five In-laws.
Case Brief- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
Later, the trial court took cognizance of the offense alleged against the husband and In-laws and initiated the proceedings against them. The wife was examined under Section 200 of CrPC in the trial court, and on the basis of the same, the summons was issued to the husband and In-laws, but when they appeared in the court, they were granted bail, and later on, they preferred to file their prayer for discharge. The prayer filed by the husband and in-laws was disposed of by the trial court by the order dated 10.08.2016 and rejected their prayer for discharge.
The husband and In-laws have filed the present petition with the prayer to invoke provisions under Section 482 of CrPC, to quash the entire said proceedings against them.
_________________________________________________
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 Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband and In-laws submitted that the present case against the husband and In-laws is only an outcome of vengeance and malice by the wife who has not ever been successful in her several endeavors to victimize the husband and In-laws.
It is also submitted that there are no sufficient materials in the present case against the husband and In-laws to proceed against them. The proceedings now pending in the trial court against the husband and In-laws are only a gross abuse of the process of the court.
It is further submitted that the wife has voluntarily left her matrimonial home much before the date of filing of the complaint, and the fact that the court in a proceeding under Section 125 of CrPC has already categorically held the fact of voluntarily leaving the wife from her matrimonial home is a very relevant fact to maintain in any criminal case for an offense under Section 498A against the husband and In-laws which the wife has intentionally suppressed in the trial court.
Arguments- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
Furthermore, it is submitted that in the complaint, the wife has also suppressed the fact about the pendency of two suits which the first is a title suit pending in the civil court, Burdwan and the second is a matrimonial suit pending in the district court, Hooghly. The first suit is pending for claiming the return of the money of amount of Rs One lakh from the father of the wife to the husband which her father took earlier from the husband but later denied to pay back, and the second suit was preferred by the husband seeking dissolution of his marriage with the wife by a decree of divorce.
It is also submitted that a proceeding initiated by the wife in an appropriate court under Section 125 of CrPC for maintenance has also been dismissed by the said court on the ground that the wife was not able to prove satisfactorily as to her indigence and vagrancy, instead, it was proved that the wife has voluntarily left her matrimonial home.
He also submitted that all these facts are very relevant for the trial court before taking cognizance of the complaint filed by the wife against the husband and In-laws, which the trial court has failed to take note of, or it was suppressed from the trial court, and so the complaint filed by the wife is a sum-total of fraudulent misrepresentation to warrant only its rejection.
Arguments- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
He further submitted that the marriage between the wife and her husband took place on 23.11.2005, whereas the wife left her matrimonial home in July 2006, and since thereafter the wife sat tight and has not come up with any allegation of torture, dowry demand, etc. and only in the year 2015, the wife filed the present complaint dated 29.08.2015 without any explanation as to the reason of delay in filing the said complaint, and hence it is liable to be rejected.
Furthermore, it is submitted that the crux of the dispute between the wife, husband, and In-laws is mainly due to the alleged non-payment of an amount of Rs One Lakh taken by the father of the wife from the husband, and the nature of the dispute is only civil and there is no scope for the criminal justice system to solve the said matter.
It is also submitted that the mother-in-law is an octogenarian person, whereas two out of the five In-laws are residents of different states, and accordingly, these In-laws had not and could not contribute to the alleged offense due to their lack of proximity to the matrimonial home of the wife, and they could not have played any role and the allegations against them are frivolous.
Arguments- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
It is further submitted that the statements made in the complaint by the wife, even if taken at their face value and accepted in entirety, the said statements would not prima facie constitute any offense or make out any case against the husband and five In-laws, and no prudent person could reach on the basis of the same to a conclusion that there is sufficient ground to proceed against the husband and In-laws, and the entire proceedings are only malafide and malicious.
Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of the proceedings against the husband and five In-laws.
On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife submitted that the offense alleged against the husband and In-laws is a continuing offense and the point of belated filing of the complaint would not render the right of the wife, and in so far as the wife has been able to successfully put forward the sufficient materials against the husband and In-laws in support of the alleged facts and circumstances of the present case.
Arguments- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
It is also submitted that the complaint filed by the wife is enough elaborate regarding the modes and manner in which the husband and In-laws have inflicted torture upon the wife during her matrimonial life, and thus the trial court has directed itself rightly in weighing and assessing the credibility of the statements made in the complaint, and a prima facie case has been made out against the husband and In-laws from there.
It is further submitted that in view of the prima facie offense being made out against the husband and In-laws in the complaint, the only course of action left upon the trial court is to issue a process to the husband and In-laws under section 204 of CrPC, and after the examination of the wife under section 200 of CrPC, and finding prima facie materials against the husband and In-laws, the provisions under section 203 of CrPC would not have come into play in the present case.
It is also submitted that the application filed by the husband and In-laws in the trial court is improper and erroneous, and the prayer made by them in the same is more of a nature under Section203 of CrPC than that under Section 227 of CrPC, and their present case is not based on sufficient grounds to warrant the present court’s interference, in the exercise of its inherent power.
Therefore, it is prayed that the petition filed by the husband and five In-laws shall be dismissed.
_________________________________________________
_____________________________________
Referred Judgements- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
- S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu (dead) by LRS Vs. Jagannath (dead) by LRS & Ors.
- Hamza Haji Vs. State of Kerala & Anr.
- Dalip Singh Vs. State of U.P.
- Kishan Singh (dead) through LRS Vs. Gurpal Singh & Ors.
- Robert John D’Souza & Ors. Vs. Stephen V. Gomes & Anr.
- Suresh Vs. Mahadevappa Shivappa Danannava & Anr.
- Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia & Ors. Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre & Ors.
- State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors.
- Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr.
- Inder Mohan Goswami & Anr. Vs. State of Uttaranchal & Ors.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
It is stated by the court that in the present case, the court is invited to invoke its inherent and extraordinary jurisdiction under provisions of Section 482 of CrPC, which the court is empowered to exercise to prevent abuse of process of any court or to secure the ends of the justice, and in several cases, the constitutional courts including the Hon’ble Apex Court have elaborated regarding the appropriate situations as to when and in what manner the court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction as stated above.
By referring to one of the above-mentioned cases, the court also stated that the inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC have to be exercised carefully, sparingly, and with great caution and only when such exercise is justified to be exercised by the tests specifically laid down in the said section itself, and the authority of the court exists for securing and advancement of justice, and if any abuse of process is leading to injustice, then the court would be justified in preventing injustice by invoking its inherent power in absence of any specific provisions in the statute.
It is further stated by the court the power vested in the court is to exercise its discretion and to interfere in the criminal proceedings which have been initiated not considering the fact that the person who filed the complaint has not disclosed any prima facie ingredient of offense against the accused person and that the complaint has not been made out a prosecutable case against the accused.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
It is also stated by the court that after careful consideration of the complaint filed by the wife, it appears that the wife has alleged infliction of torture, cruelty, and rude behavior by the husband and In-laws towards her after the marriage and when she was living in the matrimonial home.
It is further stated that in the long complaint, the wife has not mentioned an incident of torture which might have driven her to extremes of committing suicide, etc., and the court is constrained to find that mere allegation of demand of dowry or torture, and further torture upon the wife for non-fulfillment of dowry demand would not constitute an offense under Section 498A of IPC unless it is shown prima facie that such unlawful demand or cruelty has pushed the wife to her limits.
Furthermore, it is stated by the court that during all this period, the wife has been very conscious about her rights in her matrimonial life, she has filed a case for maintenance, recovery of stridhan properties, and fighting a case for divorce, but on contrary, the complaint reveals that the wife has simply avoided mentioning any incident or development post her leaving the matrimonial home.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
The court also stated that the wife was duty bound to come with clean hands to let the trial court know about the actual background of the case in order to come to a proper finding related to the maintainability but the wife has failed to do so, and it is also not on record as to what aggravating condition and circumstances have prompted the wife to lodge the instant complaint and made the allegations regarding 10 years old facts when she has never found it proper to come up with the same at any point during this period before filing this complaint.
It can be considered as a fair attribute to the probability that the complaint filed by the wife is a result of only a concoction and afterthought of a plan of action, the wife has emerged to fulfill personal vengeance against the husband and In-laws.
The court further stated that as far as an offense under Section 406 of IPC is concerned, the wife has to show prima facie ingredients of the offense of criminal breach of trust in accordance with section 405 of IPC, in the present case, however, it is on record that in the proceeding initiated by the wife under Section 94 of CrPC pending in the court of judicial magistrate, all the stridhan properties have already been seized by the police, in connection with the said case, and this fact was also not disclosed by the wife in her complaint, and no prima facie ingredients have been established by the wife.
Court’s Opinion- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
By referring to another one of the above-mentioned cases, the court also stated that when a person comes into the court to seek relief with unclean hands and tries to obtain relief by playing fraud on the court, then the court should be free to exercise its discretionary power in the prevention of the same, and a person who approaches the court is bound to produce all the relevant documents, and if he withholds a vital document to gain an advantage, then he will be guilty of playing fraud on the court as well on the opposite party.
Furthermore, it is stated by the court that the points raised by the wife in the present case are mainly technical in nature, and it should come into consideration only after satisfaction regarding the wife establishing sufficient facts and materials in the complaint constituting a strong prima facie case, and since the complaint filed by the wife lacks the same, there is no scope to even consider the points of arguments made on behalf of the wife.
In view of the above discussion, the court held that the criminal proceedings against the husband and five In-laws appear to be a gross abuse of the process of the court, and the same is not free from the malice or personal vengeance of the wife, so it is not eligible to proceed any further.
Therefore, the complaint case and all the proceedings against the husband and five In-laws are hereby quashed.
_________________________________________________
Conclusion- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023
In this article, Calcutta High Court held that the wife was duty bound to come with clean hands to let the trial court know about the actual background of the case in order to come to a proper finding related to the maintainability, but the wife has failed to do so, and the complaint filed by the wife is a result of only concoction and afterthought of a plan of action, the wife has emerged to fulfill personal vengeance against the husband and In-laws.
It is also held that no prima facie ingredients have been established by the wife against the husband and In-laws, and the points raised by the wife in the present case are mainly technical in nature, and it should come into consideration only after satisfaction regarding the wife establishing sufficient facts and materials in the complaint constituting a strong prima facie case, but the complaint filed by the wife fails to do the same.
Therefore, the complaint case and all the proceedings against the husband and five In-laws are hereby quashed.
Blogger Comment
Facebook Comment