The Delhi High Court has observed that the court must scrutinize the complaint or FIR filed by the wife against the husband and his family members to determine whether the allegations are a “case of cheer drafting” or have some element of truth.Justice Navin Chawla observed that where the wife is set to implicate the entire family of the husband in a criminal case, it is to be expected that she would get a complaint properly drafted through her lawyer making specific allegations against each one of them.The court said that it would defeat the ends of justice if only on such averment, the family members were to face the agony of trial.“In my opinion,therefore, the Court must scrutinise the complaint/FIR to determine whether the allegations are a case of clever drafting or have at least some element of truth in the same” the court said. It added that though the Court is not expected to conduct a mini-trial, it also cannot be a mere spectator and refuse to exercise the power of quashing the case that is vested in it under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., where it finds that continuation of such proceedings would defeat the ends of the justice and would amount to insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the accused and be an abuse of the criminal process.The court made the observations while quashing an FIR registered by a wife in 2017 against the maternal uncle and aunt of the husband for the offences under Section 498A, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.In the FIR, which was filed against other accused persons as well, the wife alleged that right from the date of marriage, the husband and his relatives were harassing her for dowry and beat her. While the marriage happened in 1997, the FIR was registered in 2017, i.e. after 23 years.The petition was filed by the husband's maternal uncle and aunt seeking quashing of the FIR on the ground that they were residing separately from the husband and wife and were dragged in the case only because they were the husband's family members.While quashing the FIR against them, Justice Chawla observed that mostly general and vague allegations were made against the husband's family members, thereby naming his entire family.“The FIR and even the consequential charge-sheet are based only on the averment made by the respondent no.2 in her complaint. Barring her statement/complaint, there is no other material placed on record by the respondent no.2 against the petitioners,” the court said.Counsel for Petitioners: Mr.Manoj Taneja & Mr.Vishal Khadia, AdvsCounsel for Respondents: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP; Mr.K.P. Toms & Mr.Piyush Mehra, Advs. for complainantTitle: X v. YCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 318Click Here To Read Order
