'Few Taunts Here & There Part Of Everybody Life' : Supreme Court Quashes S.498A IPC Case Against In-Laws

While quashing a case under Section 498A IPC against a father-in-law and a mother-in-law, the Supreme Court recently observed that High Courts, while dealing with prayers of relatives of husband under Section 482 CrPC, must examine possibility of malafides behind the complaint."in matters arising from matrimonial disputes, particularly where the allegations are levelled after many years of marriage and, that too, after one party initiates divorce proceeding against the other, the Court must be circumspect in taking the allegations at their face value. Rather, it must examine, where allegations of mala fides are there, whether those allegations have been levelled with an oblique purpose. More so, while considering the prayer of the relatives of the husband", said a bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Manmohan.Briefly put, the Court was dealing with a case where the complainant-wife's husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law approached the Gujarat High Court for quashing of FIR lodged against them under Sections 498A/411 IPC. However, the High Court dismissed their petition.The marriage between the appellant-husband and the complainant-wife had taken place in 2005. Three days after summons of the divorce case filed by the husband were served, the wife lodged the impugned FIR against him and his parents. Seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings, the accused moved the High Court. They contended that the FIR was a counterblast to the divorce proceedings and an abuse of process of Court.The High Court however rejected their prayers, noting that the FIR alleged mental harassment of the complainant and there were also allegations (albeit without specific details) regarding demand of money earned by her as salary. The Court opined that once allegations are there, whether they are true or false is to be determined during the trial.Challenging the High Court's dismissal, the accused averred before the Supreme Court that the allegations in respect of harassment were levelled after 14 years of marriage and only 3 days after summons of the divorce case were served upon the complainant. Alleging malafides to the complaint, it was further contended that the parents-in-law had been living separately and the allegations of torture levelled against the husband were not specific.On behalf of the complainant, it was argued that the chargesheet had been filed and the correctness of the allegations ought to be determined during trial.Going through the allegations, the Supreme Court noted that as per the complainant, there were no issues in the marriage initially. Later, when the parents-in-law started living with the couple, she had to suffer taunts over trivial issues. She was employed since 2008, stayed at different rented accommodations post-marriage, and allegedly used to hand-over her salary to her father-in-law who deprived her of it. Further, the appellant-husband was statedly having an affair, due to which he used to torture her physically and mentally (to end the relationship) and eventually filed a divorce petition.Based on the record, the Court noted that at the time when the FIR was registered, the complainant had been living with her parents. There was no specific allegation of dowry demand and the allegations against the parents-in-law were limited to extending of taunts and custody-related issues of children. Moreover, the FIR was lodged merely 3 days after the service of summons of the divorce proceedings."In these circumstances, we will have to consider whether the impugned proceedings are vexatious and mala fide, particularly in the context of a matrimonial dispute where time and again Courts have been cautioned to be circumspect to obviate malicious prosecution of family members of the main accused", the Court said.Considering the nature of allegations levelled, it noted that the complainant did not give specific details about the taunts allegedly made by the parents-in-law. "Moreover, a few taunts here and there is a part of everyday life which for happiness of the family are usually ignored", the Court opined.Ultimately, it ordered that the case proceed only qua the appellant-husband, as there were allegations of physical and mental torture against him. The criminal proceedings qua the parents-in-law were quashed.Before disposing of the matter, however, the Court expressed that the High Court adopted an "extremely pedantic approach" while dealing with the case. It cautioned that in matrimonial cases, High Courts must be circumspect about taking allegations at face value when they are levelled after years of marriage and especially when divorce petition has been filed by a party.Appearance: Advocates Mohd Parvez Dabas, Uzmi Jameel Husain, Nadeem Qureshi and AoR Syed Mehdi Imam (for petitioners); Advocates Prashant Bhagwati, Prafull Bhardwaj and AoRs Swati Ghildiyal, Siddhant Sharma (for respondents)S.498A IPC | When Family Relations Are Sought To Be Brought Under Criminal Proceedings, Courts Should Be...

'Few Taunts Here & There Part Of Everybody Life' : Supreme Court Quashes S.498A IPC Case Against In-Laws

Debby Jain

The Court must be circumspect in accepting the allegations which are raised after many years of marriage, and that too after one party initiated divorce proceedings.

Tags