The Supreme Court has reiterated that allowing prosecution of Husband's Family under Section 498A IPC in the absence of clear allegations against them is simply an abuse of the process of law.

The Division Bench comprising of Justice S. Abdul Nazeer and Justice Krishna Murari has expressed grave concern about increased tendency to employ provisions such as Section 498A IPC as instruments to settle personal scores against the husband and his relatives.

In the appeal filed herein, the relatives of husband has assailed the Patna High Court order wherein their plea for quashing of an FIR lodged by the complainant-wife. The FIR constitutes offences under Sections 341, 323, 379, 354, 498A read with Section 34 IPC.

The wife has alleged that she was repeatedly tortured physically and mentally for dowry demand while the appellants have contended that the FIR in question has been made with a revengeful intent, merely to harass them.

The Counsel for the Appellants herein contended that the Police Officer was duty bound to conduct a preliminary inquiry before registering the FIR as this instant case falls within the categories of cases on which a preliminary enquiry may be made. Reliance was placed on Lalita Kumari Vs. Govt. of U.P. & Ors, 2013 Latest Caselaw 779 SC.

It was further submitted that the FIR in question has been made with a revengeful intent, merely to harass the Appellant in-laws herein, and should be dealt with accordingly. Reliance was placed on Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and another Vs. Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others, 2018 Latest Caselaw 651 SC 

The Court at the outset shedded light on the misuse of Section 498A of IPC and noted:

"incorporation of section 498A of IPC was aimed at preventing cruelty committed upon a woman by her husband and her in-laws, by facilitating rapid state intervention. However, it is equally true, that in recent times, matrimonial litigation in the country has also increased significantly and there is a greater disaffection and friction surrounding the institution of marriage, now, more than ever. This has resulted in an increased tendency to employ provisions such as 498A IPC as instruments to settle personal scores against the husband and his relatives."

 It made referrence to SC Ruling in this regard, Rajesh Sharma & ors. Vs. State of U.P. & ANR., 2017 Latest Caselaw 513 SC and landmark case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar & ANR., 2014 Latest Caselaw 427 SC, Preeti Gupta & ANR. Vs. State of Jharkhand & ANR., 2010 Latest Caselaw 574 SC, Geeta Mehrotra & ANR. Vs. State of U.P. & ANR., 2012 Latest Caselaw 603 SC,

In recent ruling in K. Subba Rao & Ors. Vs. The State of Telangana Rep. by its Secretary, Department of Home and Ors., 2018 Latest Caselaw 570 SC, the Supreme Court has observed that Courts should be careful in proceeding against the distant relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. The relatives of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime are made out.

In regard to above rulings, the Court pointed out that the Apex Court time and again 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.

"The above-mentioned decisions clearly demonstrate that this court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse of section 498A IPC and the increased tendency of implicating relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes, without analysing the long term ramifications of a trial on the complainant as well as the accused. It is further manifest from the said judgments that false implication by way of general omnibus allegations made in the course of matrimonial dispute, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law. "

 In the present case, the Court noted that upon a perusal of the contents of the FIR it is revealed that general allegations are levelled against the Appellants.

"The complainant alleged that ‘all accused harassed her mentally and threatened her of terminating her pregnancy’. Furthermore, no specific and distinct allegations have been made against either of the Appellants herein, i.e., none of the Appellants have been attributed any specific role in furtherance of the general allegations made against them. This simply leads to a situation wherein one fails to ascertain the role played by each accused in furtherance of the offence. The allegations are therefore general and omnibus and can at best be said to have been made out on account of small skirmishes. Insofar as husband is concerned, since he has not appealed against the order of the High court, we have not examined the veracity of allegations made against him. However, as far as the Appellants are concerned, the allegations made against them being general and omnibus, do not warrant prosecution."

The appeal was thus accordingly allowed and the HC impugned order was set aside.

Read Order Here:

Picture Source :