Omnibus Allegations Of Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Do Not Warrant Prosecution: Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court has held that omnibus allegations under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code (Cruelty) do not warrant prosecution.

"The allegations against the petitioners in both the writ in my considered view, are omnibus. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam Vs. The State of Bihar general and omnibus allegations do not warrant under Section 498-A of IPC. Further, the version put forth by the respondent in the form of an independent witness is also no more a new version," the Court held.

The order was passed by Justice E.V. Venugopal in a batch of writ petitions, where the petitioners prayed to quash the criminal cases pending against them before a Metropolitan Magistrate.

The petitioners, (who were the in-laws and other relatives of the complainant) were arrayed as accused in a domestic violence and dowry harassment case.

The de facto complainant had contended that all the petitioners herein and her husband had demanded from her dowry on various occasions and subjected her to various other forms of cruelty.

It was stated that a charge sheet was filed and the investigating team found, that prima facie, a case was made only against the husband of the complainant. But, 2 years later, the investigating authority filed an additional charge sheet against the petitioners herein. The same was taken on record and a criminal case was started.

The prosecution contended that certain independent witnesses could not be examined at the time of filing the first chargesheet, and once they were examined it was evident that a case was made against the petitioner. For this, an additional charge sheet was filed, it was stated.

The bench noted that the 'independent witnesses' were none other than the parents of the de facto complaint.

"The witnesses examined by the investigating agency are none other than the parents of the third respondent. It is not known why the investigating officer filed the initial charge sheet examining the parents of the third respondent they were available," it stated.

The Bench further noted that all of the information, based on which the subsequent charge sheet was filed, was present with the investigating authority, even at the time of filing the first chargesheet, and that the entire information was omnibus.

Thus, the writs were allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner were quashed.

W.P. 6403 and 11387 of 2015

Counsel for petitioners: Muddu Vijay, appearing on behalf of Aequitasjuris Law Firm

Counsel for respondents: Ch. Samson Babu, Vizarath Ali (APP)

Click Here To Read/Download Order