Karnataka High Court Quashes Dowry FIR, Notes Alleged Payments Unbelievable Given Complainant Family's Financial Condition
The Karnataka High Court quashed a dowry demand FIR registered against the husband and his kin, finding that the allegations were baseless specially in view of the fact that the wife's family belonged to economically weaker section wherein no financial sources were shown to prove how the alleged demand was paid. The charge sheet alleged that husband and his kin demanded Rs.10 Lakh, 1 kg of...
The Karnataka High Court quashed a dowry demand FIR registered against the husband and his kin, finding that the allegations were baseless specially in view of the fact that the wife's family belonged to economically weaker section wherein no financial sources were shown to prove how the alleged demand was paid.
The charge sheet alleged that husband and his kin demanded Rs.10 Lakh, 1 kg of gold, 2 kgs of silver as dowry, out of which the complainant's family allegedly paid Rs.5 Lakh in cash, 500 grams of gold and silver articles.
The petitioners produced documents to show that the father and mother of complainant are the beneficiaries of Sandya Suraksh Yojane. The Scheme introduced by the State Government, is meant for the persons below the income of Rs.20,000 per month, and that the same is meant for economically weaker sections in the society. It was alleged that making allegations on demand and payment of dowry and cruelty is only to see that the petitioners are put behind bars, when there was no source shown to explain how the complainant's family paid the alleged demand.
On the allegation regarding the source of the dowry considering the complainant's economic status Justice MG Uma said:
"I find considerable force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners in that regard. Even though, the final report came to be filed after investigation, the Investigating Officer unfortunately, has not applied his mind to find out any prima-facie materials regarding the source of such valuables for having paid to the petitioners".
The court in its order referred to various decisions and observed that although Section 498A IPC was enacted to address cruelty against married women, courts must remain vigilant against its misuse through vague and generalized allegations arising from matrimonial disputes, and the prosecution should not proceed where there are no prima facie materials available on record.
The court said that allegations against relatives, particularly those residing separately or having limited interaction with the complainant, require more careful scrutiny and cautious evaluation, and they must not be roped in at the whims and fancies of the complainant with the intent to cause harassment.
"It was emphasized that, dowry related allegations made after the breakdown of marriage must be examined with circumspection, and that exaggerated or unsupported claims regarding dowry or marriage expenses should be verified in accordance with the provisions and procedural requirements under the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Rules. Now the statistics disclose that there is unreasonable rise in filing of the complaints by the wives or their family members against the husband and his family members making very serious allegations. If the police register the FIR on the basis of such bald complaints, apprehend the accused mentioned therein and later proceed with the investigation, unmindful of fact that a duty is cast on them to make a preliminary enquiry before proceeding to register a criminal case, it will satisfy the evil intention of the complaint but it will result in serious consequence, which cannot be compensated at a later point of time. It is high time to make such complainants understand that, bald and general allegations are not sufficient to register the FIR but there must be prima-facie materials to support the same. Further the complainants and her family members are also accountable for encouraging payment of dowry on mere demand"
On 14.07.2020, the husband issued a legal notice to complainant calling upon her to give consent for divorce. He lodged a complaint on 18.07.2020 with the police against complainant and others, who said to have threatened him and the same was registered.On 04.08.2020, wife filed her reply to the legal notice, however there was no allegation found in the reply. She even recorded her statement and did not make any allegations regarding dowry demand etc.
The court said that even though the complainant filed the complaint making serious allegations, she did not refer to the legal notice issued by her husband seeking divorce and her reply to the same as well two prior complaints made by her husband. It noted that in her reply to these complaints she did not make dowry demand allegations.
"There is deliberate suppression of these material facts. It is stated that now respondent No.2 herself has filed the petition seeking divorce. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, respondent No.2 was having extra marital relationship, which led to marital discard and she is making baseless and false allegation not only against petitioner No.1 but against all the family members. It is unfortunate to note that police have registered criminal complaint without making any preliminary enquiry inspite of issuance of several directions by this Court as well as by the Hon'ble Apex Court to handle the criminal complaints relating to matrimonial disputes, with care and caution by scrutinizing the allegations and registration of FIR only on prima-facie satisfaction about its probability," the court said.
The court said that there was no prima facie material supporting the allegations made by the wife as seen from the final report and quashed the FIR.
The court said that this was a "classic case where the wife registers the criminal case against the husband and his family members making allegations to seek sympathy" and to see that the criminal case is registered and the accused mentioned in the first information are put behind bars without explaining why no complaint was filed initially.
The court said that the police in such cases who registers the case without conducting any preliminary enquiry and without recording his satisfaction regarding the allegations made therein are equally responsible.
Finding that the proceedings were lodged based on "baseless, general and sweeping allegations" without there being any prima-facie materials to accept the same in view of the dates, events and the financial condition of the complainant and her parents, the court quashed the same.
The plea was allowed.
Case title: X & Others v/s State of Karnataka & Anr.
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 7331 OF 2021