What is the latest Supreme Court judgment on 498A?

Recent Supreme Court judgments like Kahkashan Kausar v. State of Bihar emphasize that vague allegations and misuse of 498A can lead to quashing of FIR.

Can Supreme Court quash 498A cases?

Yes, under Section 482 CrPC, High Courts have inherent power to quash 498A FIRs where no prima facie case exists.

Can 498A FIR be quashed?

Yes, a 498A FIR can be quashed by the High Court under Section 482 CrPC if the allegations are false, vague, or no prima facie case exists.

What is the strongest ground for quashing 498A?

The strongest ground is lack of specific allegations and absence of prima facie evidence against the accused.

Can relatives be removed from 498A case?

Yes, courts often quash proceedings against distant relatives if no specific role is assigned to them.

Matrimonial Litigation & 498A Defense Strategy in India

Latest Supreme Court Judgments on 498A IPC

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 04 Aug 2023 13:06:00 +0000

Latest Supreme Court Judgments on 498A IPC (2026 Updated List with Key Takeaways)

Quick Answer:
Some of the latest important Supreme Court judgments on 498A IPC include:

Kahkashan Kausar v. State of Bihar (2022)
K. Subba Rao v. State of Telangana (2018)
Geeta Mehrotra v. State of UP (2012)
Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand (2010)

These cases emphasize that vague allegations and misuse of 498A can lead to quashing of FIR.

Related Legal Strategies:

Introduction

This article compiles influential landmark judgments that serve as precedents for lower courts when dealing with cases filed under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It explores significant rulings from the Supreme Court that have established crucial legal principles, interpretations, and guidelines for assessing the validity of 498A IPC cases and deciding whether they should be quashed.

The article provides a detailed analysis of the reasoning behind these landmark judgments and their key takeaways, highlighting their impact on shaping the approach of lower courts in handling such cases. By emphasizing the application of these judgments as precedents, the article underscores the evolving legal landscape surrounding Section 498A IPC and how these influential decisions contribute to ensuring a fair and just legal process.

Facing a 498A case? Get structured legal strategy and drafting assistance.

Request Consultation

1. Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam v. The State of Bihar, delivered on 8th February 2022

The landmark judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Kahkashan Kausar @Sonam v. The State of Bihar, delivered on 8th February 2022, revolves around the quashing of an FIR filed under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against the appellants, who are the in-laws of the complainant wife. The key reasoning, analysis, and takeaways from this judgment are as follows:

Factual Background:

The complainant got married on 18th September 2017. She previously filed a complaint against her husband and the appellants for dowry demand and harassment, which resulted in summons only against her husband and not the in-laws. Subsequently, she filed another complaint in 2019, alleging pressurization to buy a car as dowry and threats to terminate her pregnancy if the demands were not met.

Appellants' Contention:

The appellants contended that a preliminary inquiry should have been conducted before registering the FIR, as mandated by the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P. They argued that the FIR was made with a revengeful intent to harass them.

State's Contention:

The State of Bihar argued that the present FIR pertained to offenses committed in 2019, after assurances were given by the husband to not harass the complainant for dowry. Thus, it constituted a fresh cause of action and was independent of the earlier FIR.

Key Takeaways from Previous Judgments:

The Supreme Court highlighted the increasing misuse of Section 498A IPC, which was introduced to address cruelty against women in matrimonial relationships. The Court acknowledged that matrimonial litigation has escalated in recent times, leading to false complaints and the misuse of provisions against the husband and his relatives.

The Court cautioned against the tendency to implicate all immediate relatives of the husband without specific instances of their involvement in the crime being made out. It emphasized the need for careful scrutiny of allegations and the potential harassment caused by unfounded complaints.

Analysis and Impact on Lower Courts:

In this case, the Court found that the allegations against the appellants were general and omnibus in nature, lacking specificity. They were not attributed any specific role in the alleged offenses. The Court emphasized that prosecutions should be avoided when allegations are not specific and fail to make out a prima facie case.

The judgment reinforces the need for lower courts to exercise caution and circumspection while dealing with cases under Section 498A IPC. It warns against proceeding against distant relatives without specific involvement in the offense and discourages abuse of the legal process.

Key Takeaway:

This latest supreme court judgement on 498a reiterates the importance of scrutinizing allegations in matrimonial disputes and avoiding uncalled-for arrests based on general and omnibus allegations. It emphasizes the need for lower courts to promote amicable resolutions and consider the long-term implications of trial proceedings. The judgment sets a precedent for ensuring a fair and just legal process in cases related to Section 498A IPC.

Proper FIR analysis is critical to your defense. Identify weak points and contradictions early.

Get Strategy Guidance

2. K. Subba Rao v. The State of Telangana, delivered on 21st August 2018

The Supreme Court of India, in the case of K. Subba Rao v. The State ofTelangana, delivered on 21st August 2018- Latest Supreme Court Judgement on 498a , dealt with an appeal filed by the maternal uncles of the husband who were implicated in a criminal case registered under Sections 498A, 120B, 420, and 365 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) based on a complaint filed by the wife. The key reasoning, analysis, and takeaways from this landmark judgment are as follows:

Factual Background:

The complainant (Respondent No. 2) submitted a complaint alleging harassment by her husband and his family members, including the appellants (maternal uncles of the husband). An FIR was registered based on this complaint. The appellants filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) seeking to quash the proceedings, which was dismissed by the High Court. The appellants then appealed to the Supreme Court against the High Court's decision.

Charge Sheet and Supplementary Charge Sheet:

A charge sheet was filed against the appellants after the investigation was completed. Later, a supplementary charge sheet was also filed. The charge sheet alleged that the appellants supported the husband in harassing the complainant for dowry and conspired with him to take away their child to the United States.

Key Takeaways from Previous Judgments:

The Supreme Court highlighted that criminal proceedings should not be interdicted at the interlocutory stage unless there is an abuse of the process of the court. However, the court also emphasized the need for careful consideration in cases involving distant relatives in crimes related to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. Relatives of the husband should not be roped in solely based on omnibus allegations, and specific instances of their involvement in the crime must be established.

Analysis and Impact on Lower Courts:

The Supreme Court carefully examined the charge sheet and supplementary charge sheet in this case. It found that the appellants were not the immediate family members of the husband but rather his maternal uncles. The charge sheet only made bald statements regarding their alleged involvement in the crime without providing specific instances of their participation.

Based on this analysis, the Supreme Court concluded that a prima facie case had not been established against the appellants for proceeding against them under the mentioned sections of the IPC. It, therefore, quashed the proceedings against the appellants.

Need help with your case?

Request Legal Consultation

Key Takeaway:

This latest supreme court judgement on 498a K. Subba Rao v. The State of Telangana sets an important precedent for lower courts to be cautious while proceeding against distant relatives in cases related to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. It emphasizes the need for specific and concrete evidence to implicate relatives of the husband in such cases and discourages the use of omnibus allegations as a basis for prosecution. This judgment ensures that distant relatives are not unnecessarily embroiled in criminal cases without sufficient evidence of their involvement in the alleged crime.

Key Takeaway: FIR can be quashed where allegations are general and no specific role is assigned.

Need help preparing counter complaints or planning your defense strategy?

Consult Now

3. Geeta Mehrotra & Anr vs. State Of U.P. & Anr

The landmark judgment in the case of Geeta Mehrotra & Anr vs. State Of U.P. & Anr was delivered by the Supreme Court of India on 17th October 2012- Latest Supreme Court Judgement on 498a. The case involved an appeal by special leave against an order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad that had disposed of an application for quashing criminal proceedings under Sections 498A/323/504/506 IPC read with Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The main appellants in this case were the sister-in-law and brother-in-law of the complainant, who had filed a case against her husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, brother-in-law, and sister-in-law.

Key Takeaways:

a. Territorial Jurisdiction: One of the primary issues in this case was the question of territorial jurisdiction. The complainant had lodged the FIR at Allahabad, but the alleged incidents took place at Faridabad, Haryana. The appellants argued that the investigating authorities had traversed beyond their territorial limits, which was an abuse of the process of law. The Supreme Court upheld that the question of territorial jurisdiction could be decided by the trial court, but it was also critical for the High Court to examine the case on other grounds and determine whether the proceedings against the appellants were justified or not.

b. Involvement of Family Members in Matrimonial Disputes: The Supreme Court emphasized that matrimonial disputes should be resolved amicably rather than being dragged into lengthy court battles. It observed that there has been an outburst of matrimonial disputes, and courts should not encourage involving family members unnecessarily. Courts must adopt a cautious approach in matters of quashing criminal proceedings, especially in matrimonial disputes where family members are named in the FIR without specific allegations against them.

c. Quashing of FIRs: The Supreme Court held that if the FIR does not disclose the commission of an offense, the court would be justified in quashing the proceedings to prevent the abuse of the process of law. However, it cautioned that the court must be careful while quashing FIRs and consider the specific allegations against the accused and the possibility of over-implication.

Need help with your case?

Request Legal Consultation

d. Abandonment of Criminal Proceedings: In this case, the complainant had obtained an ex-parte decree of divorce against her husband. The Supreme Court pointed out that in cases of matrimonial disputes, where parties have settled their differences and agreed to mutual divorce, refusing to exercise inherent powers to quash the proceedings would be improper. The court clarified that Section 320 of the Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to quashing proceedings when parties have settled their disputes.

e. Abuse of the Process of Law: The court held that when the FIR does not disclose specific allegations against certain accused, and they are named casually without any material constituting an offense, continuing with the trial against them would amount to an abuse of the process of the court.

Impact on Lower Courts:

This judgment clarified the approach that lower courts should adopt while dealing with matrimonial disputes and cases involving multiple family members. It highlights the need for lower courts to carefully examine the contents of the FIR and assess whether a prima facie case is made out against all the accused, especially when family members are involved. The courts are cautioned not to mechanically send the named accused for trial if there is no specific allegation against them, and the FIR appears to be a result of over-implication or teething domestic bickering. The judgment also emphasizes the importance of amicable resolution of matrimonial disputes and discourages prolonged legal battles involving family members in such cases.

Overall, this This latest supreme court judgement on 498a shaped the approach of lower courts in handling matrimonial disputes and cases involving family members, emphasizing the need for a cautious and balanced approach to prevent unnecessary harassment of accused parties and encourage amicable resolutions.

Avoid common legal mistakes that weaken your case. Plan your strategy properly.

Request Consultation

4. Preeti Gupta & Anr vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr

The case of Preeti Gupta & Anr vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr, decided by the Supreme Court of India on August 13, 2010- Latest Supreme Court Judgement on 498a, is a significant landmark judgment that sheds light on the approach to be adopted by courts in handling cases under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Section 498-A deals with the offence of subjecting a married woman to cruelty by her husband or his relatives.

Key Takeaways:

a. Scope of Courts' Inherent Powers: The Supreme Court reiterated that every High Court has inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to act ex debito justitiae, i.e., to ensure real and substantial justice, prevent abuse of the court's process, and secure the ends of justice. The courts must exercise these powers cautiously and sparingly.

b. Categories of Cases for Quashing Proceedings: The court listed specific categories of cases where the inherent powers of the court under Section 482 CrPC could be exercised to quash proceedings. These categories include cases where there is a legal bar against the institution or continuation of the proceedings, the allegations do not constitute an offence, or the evidence fails to prove the charge.

c. Abuse of Section 498-A: The court recognized that matrimonial litigation, especially those related to Section 498-A IPC, has significantly increased, and many complaints are filed without proper deliberations. The court cautioned against the abuse of this provision for settling personal scores or with oblique motives.

d. Need for Caution in Implication of Relatives: The court emphasized that courts must be cautious when implicating relatives of the husband in cases under Section 498-A. Over implication of family members who were not directly involved in the alleged incidents can lead to grave injustice and harassment.

e. Encouragement for Amicable Resolution: The court called for the involvement of lawyers in promoting amicable resolutions of matrimonial disputes rather than prolonging criminal trials. It urged lawyers to treat Section 498-A complaints as human problems and to discourage over implication and multiple cases based on the same incident.

f. Reforms in the Law: The court highlighted the need for legislative reforms and a serious relook into Section 498-A IPC to address the growing concerns of false and exaggerated complaints. It recommended that the legislature consider the informed public opinion and pragmatic realities while making necessary changes to the law.

Impact on Lower Courts:

The judgment has had a significant impact on shaping the approach of lower courts in handling cases under Section 498-A IPC. It has emphasized the importance of scrutinizing complaints carefully and objectively before summoning the accused. Lower courts have become more cautious in implicating distant relatives who have no direct involvement in the alleged incidents. Additionally, the judgment has encouraged courts to promote mediation and amicable resolution in matrimonial disputes and avoid unnecessarily subjecting accused parties to long and painful criminal trials.

Overall, this latest supreme court judgement on 498a has played a vital role in bringing attention to the issues arising from the misuse of Section 498-A and has influenced the approach of lower courts in ensuring justice while protecting innocent parties from unwarranted harassment.

5. Neelu Chopra & Anr vs Bharti

The Supreme Court of India, in its landmark judgment in the case of Neelu Chopra & Anr vs Bharti on 7 October 2009, dealt with the issue of quashing criminal proceedings under Sections 406 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against the aged parents of the deceased husband.

The key takeaways and impact of this judgment on shaping the approach of lower courts in handling such cases are as follows:

Need help with your case?

Request Legal Consultation

a. Importance of Specific Allegations: The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of specific allegations in a complaint to initiate criminal proceedings. The court observed that vague and general complaints without clear particulars of the accused's role in the alleged offense could amount to an abuse of the legal process.

b. Mere Mention of Sections Not Enough: The court ruled that merely mentioning the sections of the law in a complaint is not sufficient. The complainant must provide specific details about each accused's involvement in the alleged offense to justify initiating criminal proceedings.

c. Proper Particulars of Offense: The judgment emphasized the necessity of providing particulars of the offense committed by each accused and the role played by them in committing the offense. The complainant must provide specific details about the accused's actions to substantiate the charges.

d. Avoiding Misuse of Section 498A: The court recognized the misuse of Section 498A, which deals with the cruelty by the husband or his relatives towards the wife. It noted that the section is increasingly being misused in matrimonial disputes. The court cautioned lower courts to examine the evidence carefully before proceeding with such cases to avoid causing unnecessary suffering to the accused.

e. Protection of Aged and Elderly: The judgment provided protection to aged parents of a deceased husband who were implicated in a case without specific allegations. The court highlighted that continuing the prosecution against the elderly parents based on vague and unsubstantiated complaints would amount to an abuse of the legal process.

f. Significance of Timing: The court considered the timing of filing the complaint in this case. The complainant filed the complaint nine years after the marriage, which raised questions about the veracity and credibility of the allegations.

g. High Court's Role: The judgment also criticized the High Court's decision not to quash the complaint despite its vagueness and lack of specific allegations against the appellants. The Supreme Court emphasized that the High Court must carefully examine the merits of each case and exercise its inherent powers judiciously to prevent abuse of the legal process.

h. The burden of Proof: The court highlighted that the burden of proof lies on the complainant to substantiate the allegations with specific evidence and particulars. Merely making allegations without credible evidence is not enough to sustain criminal proceedings.

Overall, this latest supreme court judgement on 498a played a significant role in shaping the approach of lower courts in handling complaints under Section 498A and similar cases involving matrimonial disputes. It emphasized the need for specific allegations, proper particulars of the offense, and careful consideration of evidence before proceeding with such cases. The judgment aimed to prevent the misuse of Section 498A and protect the elderly and innocent family members from unnecessary harassment and suffering.

Facing 498A / DV Case?

Get Help

6. Shakson Belthissor vs State of Kerala & Anr

The landmark judgment of Shakson Belthissor vs State of Kerala & Anr, delivered by the Supreme Court of India on 6 July 2009, revolves around the issue of quashing the First Information Report (FIR) and charge sheet filed against the appellant. The case pertains to allegations of cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) filed by the respondent, who is the appellant's wife.

Key Facts:

a. The appellant and the respondent got married on 23 October 1997.

b. The respondent had a previous marriage with a person named Mr. Varghese, who died in 1995, and she has two sons from that marriage.

c. The appellant was working in Saudi Arabia at the time of the marriage.

d. The respondent filed an FIR on 21 April 2002, alleging that the appellant married her during his leave and then returned to Saudi Arabia, subsequently neglecting and mistreating her.

e. The FIR and the charge sheet were filed against the appellant under Section 498A IPC, accusing him of subjecting the respondent to cruelty.

Reasoning Behind the Judgment:

The Supreme Court conducted a detailed analysis of the FIR, the charge sheet, and the relevant provisions of the IPC to determine whether a prima facie case of cruelty under Section 498A was made out against the appellant. The Court highlighted the essential ingredients of Section 498A, which include willful conduct likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or cause grave injury to her mental or physical health, or harassment with a view to coercing her or her relatives to meet an unlawful demand for property or valuable security.

The Court noted that neither explanation (a) nor explanation (b) of Section 498A IPC was applicable in this case. Explanation (a) relates to willful conduct likely to cause suicide or grave injury, which was not established in the FIR or charge sheet. Explanation (b) pertains to harassment for unlawful demands, which was also not substantiated.

The Court further cited previous decisions that emphasized the need for a clear case made out in the FIR and charge sheet to proceed with a trial. It pointed out that mere breach of contract or a civil dispute would not suffice to invoke Section 498A IPC.

Key Takeaways and Impact:

a. Strict Interpretation of Section 498A: The Supreme Court, in this judgment, emphasized the importance of a strict interpretation of Section 498A of the IPC. It clarified that for an offense under Section 498A to be made out, the allegations in the FIR or charge sheet must clearly establish acts of cruelty of such a nature that could lead the woman to commit suicide or cause grave injury or danger to her life, limb, or health (as per explanation (a) of Section 498A). Additionally, harassment with the intent of coercing her or her relatives to meet unlawful demands for property or valuable security must also be demonstrated (as per explanation (b) of Section 498A).

b. Avoiding Misuse and Abuse of Section 498A: The judgment highlights the potential for misuse and abuse of Section 498A to settle personal scores or extort money from innocent individuals. It cautioned lower courts against allowing criminal proceedings under this section based on mere allegations without adequate prima facie evidence of cruelty or harassment.

c. Scrutiny of FIRs and Charge Sheets: The Supreme Court emphasized that lower courts must carefully scrutinize the contents of FIRs and charge sheets to ensure that they disclose a prima facie case under Section 498A. The courts must not go beyond the allegations made in the complaint and should not interfere with genuine complaints that disclose a cognizable offense.

d. Preventing Vexatious Litigation: The judgment sought to prevent the harassment of innocent individuals through vexatious criminal proceedings. The Court reminded lower courts to exercise their inherent power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) judiciously and sparingly to prevent abuse of the process of law.

e. Clarity on Ingredients of Offense: The judgment clarified the essential ingredients required to constitute an offense under Section 498A. This clarity helps lower courts in determining the applicability of the section in cases before them and prevents ambiguity in interpreting the law.

Overall, this latest supreme court judgement on 498a has served as an important precedent, guiding lower courts in their approach to cases under Section 498A of the IPC. It emphasizes the need for a careful examination of the facts and evidence before initiating criminal proceedings and helps prevent the misuse of this provision to harass innocent individuals. The judgment encourages a fair and balanced approach by lower courts to ensure that genuine cases of cruelty against married women are addressed while protecting the rights of the accused from false and baseless allegations.

Key Legal Principles from Supreme Court Judgments

Vague and omnibus allegations are not sufficient
Distant relatives should not be implicated without evidence
Courts must prevent misuse of criminal law
Prima facie case must exist for prosecution
High Court can quash FIR under Section 482 CrPC

Need help with your case strategy or drafting?

Get assistance with 498A defense, DV Act replies, maintenance cases, and legal documentation.

Book Legal Consultation

Conclusion

These landmark judgments have played a crucial role in shaping the legal landscape to prevent the misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and to ensure a balanced and fair approach in dealing with cases of cruelty against married women. Here are the key takeaways and their impact on preventing the misuse of Section 498A:

a. Protection Against Misuse: It recognized the potential for the misuse of Section 498A to harass innocent individuals and their families. By emphasizing the importance of preventing vexatious litigation, the courts have ensured that the law is not misused to settle personal scores or extort money from the accused.

b. Stringent Scrutiny of Complaints: It has mandated lower courts to carefully scrutinize complaints and charge sheets to determine whether the allegations disclose a prima facie case of cruelty as defined under Section 498A. This scrutiny acts as a safeguard against baseless and malicious complaints.

c. Clear Interpretation of Section 498A: It have provided a clear interpretation of the essential ingredients required to constitute an offense under Section 498A. This clarity helps lower courts distinguish genuine cases of cruelty from those with insufficient evidence or intent to harass.

d. Protection of Rights of the Accused: It underscore the importance of protecting the fundamental rights of the accused and their families. By requiring concrete evidence of cruelty and harassment, the courts have ensured that innocent individuals are not unfairly subjected to criminal proceedings.

e. Promoting Mediation and Counseling: It have encouraged the use of mediation and counseling to resolve marital disputes. This approach helps in preserving the sanctity of marriage and reduces the adversarial nature of litigation.

f. Judicial Awareness and Sensitization: The impact of these judgements goes beyond the legal sphere. They have contributed to raising awareness among judges, lawyers, and the general public about the misuse of Section 498A. This has led to a more cautious approach while dealing with such cases.

g. Deterrent Effect: It emphasis on prosecuting false complainants and perjury has acted as a deterrent against the filing of frivolous cases under Section 498A, as individuals are now aware of the potential consequences of making false allegations.

Updated for 2026 with latest case law developments

Overall, these Latest Supreme Court Judgement on 498a have significantly influenced the approach of lower courts in handling cases under Section 498A IPC. They have fostered a more balanced and cautious attitude, which aims to protect the rights of married women while preventing the misuse of the law. By promoting fairness, justice, and adherence to the rule of law, these judgments have contributed to strengthening the legal framework and ensuring the effective implementation of Section 498A to serve its intended purpose - protecting victims of cruelty without compromising the rights of the accused.

Related Matrimonial Legal Strategy Guides

498A Defense & FIR Quashing Strategy

Step-by-step legal strategy for defending false 498A cases, quashing FIR and trial approach.

Domestic Violence Case Defense Strategy

Detailed guide on DV Act replies, interim relief defense and litigation strategy.

Maintenance Case Defense (Section 125 CrPC)

Learn how to defend maintenance claims using evidence, cross-examination and Section 125(4).

Mutual Divorce Settlement Strategy

Strategic planning for alimony, custody, settlement negotiation and legal drafting.

About Our Expert – Matrimonial Litigation Strategy Specialist

Our Expert Advocate Sahil Kapoor, a legal practitioner focused on matrimonial dispute resolution, litigation strategy, and family law matters across India.

LL.B (Law Graduate) – Practicing Advocate
LL.M in Family Law & Social Security – Gold Medalist
Post Graduate Diploma in Family Therapy & Counseling
Advanced Diploma in Family Dispute Resolution – First Rank
Research Scholar (PhD) – Matrimonial Dispute Resolution
Trained in Mediation, Negotiation & Family Dispute Resolution

The focus of this platform is to provide structured legal strategy, drafting assistance, and practical guidance for handling complex matrimonial litigation including Section 498A IPC, Domestic Violence Act cases, maintenance disputes under Section 125 CrPC, and divorce matters.

Instead of general legal advice, the approach is strategy-driven—helping individuals understand their legal position, avoid common mistakes, and plan their cases effectively.

Need help with your case strategy or legal drafting?

Request Consultation

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

Grounds for Quashing 498A FIR in India (2026) | Legal Guide + Cases

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 04 Aug 2023 06:59:00 +0000

Grounds for Quashing 498A FIR in India (2026 Guide with Case Laws)

Last Updated: January 2026

Introduction: Grounds for Quashing 498a FIR

Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was introduced to protect married women from cruelty and harassment by their husbands or their relatives. However, over the years, there have been instances of misuse of this provision, resulting in innocent individuals being falsely implicated. To safeguard the interests of justice and prevent the abuse of this provision, the courts have the power to quash a Section 498A FIR under certain circumstances. This article explores the grounds on which an accused can seek the quashing of a Section 498A FIR.

Quick Answer:
The main grounds for quashing a 498A FIR are:

Absence of specific allegations
False or vague complaint
No prima facie case
Delay in filing FIR
Settlement between parties
False implication of distant relatives

Facing a 498A case? Get structured legal strategy and drafting assistance.

Request Consultation

1. Lack of Specific Allegations

One of the primary grounds for quashing 498A FIR is the absence of specific allegations against the accused. If the complaint merely contains general and omnibus allegations without attributing any specific role to the accused in the alleged harassment or cruelty, the court may consider quashing the FIR.

In the case of Geeta Mehrotra & Anr vs State Of U.P. & Anr, the Supreme Court heard an appeal against the order of the Allahabad High Court. The High Court had rejected the appellants' application to quash the FIR filed against them under various sections of the IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The FIR was lodged by the complainant against her husband and in-laws, alleging physical and mental torture, harassment, and dowry demands. The appellants challenged the FIR on the grounds of mala fide intentions, lack of jurisdiction, and lack of prima facie case against them.

The Supreme Court observed that the High Court did not properly examine the case, and it was unclear if the FIR should be quashed against the appellants. The court noted that the complainant had obtained an ex-parte divorce decree during the case's pendency, indicating a possible lack of seriousness in pursuing the charges. Additionally, there were no specific allegations against the sister and brother of the complainant's husband, raising doubts about their involvement. As a result, the Supreme Court directed the trial court to decide the issue of jurisdiction, implying the need for proper examination of the case's merits and specific allegations before proceeding with legal action.

Need help with your case?

Request Legal Consultation

In the case of Aditya Mohta vs Unknown, the petitioner filed a revisional application seeking to quash the proceedings against him under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated in the case and that there were no specific allegations against him. The court examined the case diary and found that the petitioner had been implicated without any basis, and the allegations against him were vague and general. The court referred to previous judgments emphasizing the need for specific allegations and roles attributed to each accused. It concluded that the prosecution was unfounded and an abuse of the court process. Therefore, the court allowed the application and quashed the proceedings against the petitioner.

Proper FIR analysis is critical to your defense. Identify weak points and contradictions early.

Get Strategy Guidance

2. Delay in Filing the FIR

Courts take into account the timing of the complaint while deciding on its validity and it is also considered as one of the grounds for quashing 498a FIR. If the complaint is lodged after a considerable delay, it raises questions about the veracity and genuineness of the allegations. Delayed complaints, especially those filed years after the alleged incident, may not be considered strong enough to sustain a case under Section 498A.

In the case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. Madhusudan Rao, the Supreme Court emphasized the significance of promptly lodging a First Information Report (FIR). The court stated that delayed reporting often leads to embellishment and exaggeration, which could be a result of an afterthought. Delayed reports lose the advantage of spontaneity and may introduce a biased or concocted version of events due to consultations and deliberations. Consequently, the court highlighted the importance of satisfactorily explaining any delay in filing an FIR to maintain its veracity and credibility.

Need help with your case?

Request Legal Consultation

In the case of Mr. S.S. Seshan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 August 2022, the court examined the FIR filed by the wife under sections 498A, 506, 34 IPC, and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The court noted that the wife had only spent a week with the husband's family in Mumbai and that the marriage had not been consummated. The allegations of dowry demand and harassment were said to have occurred within a short period, from December 2018 to February 2019. However, the wife filed the complaint more than three years later, only after receiving a notice for divorce from the husband. The court concluded that there was no justification for the delay in filing the complaint and no evidence of ongoing harassment. It deemed the FIR to be a counter-blast to the divorce petition and quashed the FIR and the pending criminal proceedings.

The Karnataka High Court in case Yashwanth Bhaskar vs State By Basavanagudi P.S on 14 June, 2022 quashed the FIR and criminal proceedings against the accused (petitioners) in a case where the respondent (complainant) had alleged cruelty by her husband and in-laws. The court found that the FIR was filed after a considerable delay of nearly 2 years without any plausible explanation, raising doubts about its authenticity. Additionally, the court noted that the FIR lacked specific allegations against the accused and contained only general and omnibus accusations. Referring to Supreme Court judgments, the court expressed concern over the misuse of Section 498A of the IPC and warned against implicating relatives of the husband without a prima facie case. Based on these grounds, the court held that continuing the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of the legal process, and the FIR appeared to be lodged with a malicious intent. Consequently, the court allowed the criminal petition and quashed the chargesheet and the criminal case against the accused.

Need help preparing counter complaints or planning your defense strategy?

Consult Now

3. False or Vague Allegations

Section 498A has been misused on several occasions to settle personal scores or to harass innocent family members of the husband and is also an important grounds for quashing 498a FIR. If the FIR contains vague or frivolous allegations against the accused, it can be quashed to prevent unnecessary harassment of the accused.

In the case of Preeti Gupta & Anr v. State Of Jharkhand & Anr, the Supreme Court heard an appeal against a complaint filed by the complainant under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The appellants argued that they were not involved in the alleged incidents and the complaint against them was baseless. The High Court had declined to quash the complaint, but the Supreme Court held that the specific allegations against the appellants were limited and did not constitute an offense under Section 498A. The court emphasized that the inherent powers under Section 482 should be used to prevent abuse of court process or secure justice and in this case, the complaint should have been quashed against the appellants as they were not directly involved. The court suggested that the parties should consider obtaining a divorce by mutual consent due to temperamental incompatibility. The decision highlights the wide powers of courts under Section 482 to quash proceedings judiciously.

Avoid common legal mistakes that weaken your case. Plan your strategy properly.

Request Consultation

4. No Prima Facie Case

The court may quash a Section 498A FIR on grounds for quashing 498a FIR if, after considering the FIR and the material collected during the investigation, it finds that no prima facie case is made out against the accused. In such instances, the court may conclude that the complaint lacks merit and should not proceed to trial.

The Supreme Court's landmark decision in Kahkashan Kausar v. The State of Bihar, delivered on 8 February 2022, involved a challenge to an FIR filed against the appellants for dowry harassment and other offenses. The Court emphasized the cautious approach required in cases under Section 498A of the IPC, aimed at preventing cruelty against married women but often misused for personal vendettas. The Court held that when allegations are general and omnibus in nature, involving all immediate relatives, they must be scrutinized carefully. In this case, the Court found the FIR lacked specificity and appeared to be a result of strained family relations, leading to the quashing of the FIR against the appellants. The Court highlighted the importance of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes to avoid prolonged and acrimonious criminal trials.

5. False Implication of Relatives

Another important and most used grounds for quashing 498a FIR is absence of direct involvement of distant relatives. The courts exercise caution while proceeding against distant relatives of the husband in cases related to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. Unless specific instances of their involvement in the alleged crime are established, the relatives of the husband may not be implicated merely based on omnibus allegations.

Need help with your case?

Request Legal Consultation

In the case of K. Subba Rao v. The State of Telangana, it was further emphasized that caution should be exercised by the courts when dealing with distant relatives in cases related to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. Simply making general allegations against the husband's relatives should not be sufficient to implicate them; instead, specific instances of their direct involvement in the crime must be established.

In the case of Chandrakant Mohan Pandhare And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 20 August, 2022, the family members of the accused were distantly related to the husband and wife and did not share the same residence. The court observed that they lived separately in different places, and there was no direct association or closeness to the purported offenses.

In the case of Mahendra Chandrakant Pandhare v. The State of Maharashtra, the Bombay High Court, after the chargesheet was filed, dismissed the criminal proceedings under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The accused family members were distantly related to the husband and wife, residing separately, and not directly implicated in the alleged offenses. The court took this into account and determined that pursuing the prosecution against these distant relatives would be an unjustifiable misuse of the legal process.

In the case of Mudakappa S/O Sanna Erappa vs. The Circle Police Inspector, the Karnataka High Court dismissed the proceedings against the petitioners. The court observed that the petitioners, who included brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, and distant relatives, did not live with the complainant and resided in different locations. Consequently, it would be unfair to proceed with the trial against them, as there were no specific allegations implicating them, and they were not directly connected to the case.

6. Settlement Between Parties

In cases where the parties involved in the dispute have settled their differences amicably and have decided to withdraw the charges, the court may consider quashing the FIR. A settlement indicates the willingness of the parties to move on and avoid prolonged legal battles.

Facing 498A / DV Case?

Get Help

How to File a Petition for Quashing 498A FIR

File petition under Section 482 CrPC in High Court
Attach FIR copy and supporting documents
Highlight lack of evidence or false allegations
Cite relevant Supreme Court judgments

Final Insight:
Quashing a 498A FIR is not automatic. Success depends on:

Quality of allegations
Evidence on record
Legal strategy adopted

Every case is fact-specific and requires a tailored approach.

Related Legal Strategies:

Related Matrimonial Legal Strategy Guides

498A Defense & FIR Quashing Strategy

Step-by-step legal strategy for defending false 498A cases, quashing FIR and trial approach.

Domestic Violence Case Defense Strategy

Detailed guide on DV Act replies, interim relief defense and litigation strategy.

Maintenance Case Defense (Section 125 CrPC)

Learn how to defend maintenance claims using evidence, cross-examination and Section 125(4).

Mutual Divorce Settlement Strategy

Strategic planning for alimony, custody, settlement negotiation and legal drafting.

About Our Expert – Matrimonial Litigation Strategy Specialist

Our Expert Advocate Sahil Kapoor, a legal practitioner focused on matrimonial dispute resolution, litigation strategy, and family law matters across India.

LL.B (Law Graduate) – Practicing Advocate
LL.M in Family Law & Social Security – Gold Medalist
Post Graduate Diploma in Family Therapy & Counseling
Advanced Diploma in Family Dispute Resolution – First Rank
Research Scholar (PhD) – Matrimonial Dispute Resolution
Trained in Mediation, Negotiation & Family Dispute Resolution

Instead of general legal advice, the approach is strategy-driven—helping individuals understand their legal position, avoid common mistakes, and plan their cases effectively.

Need help with your case strategy or legal drafting?

Request Consultation

Need help with your case strategy or drafting?

Get assistance with 498A defense, DV Act replies, maintenance cases, and legal documentation.

Book Legal Consultation

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

Quashing a False 498A IPC Case on 02.03.2023: Grounds for Quashing 498a FIR-Misuse of Section 498A and the Importance of Specific Allegations

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 19 Jul 2023 07:42:00 +0000

Quashing a False 498A IPC Case on 02.03.2023

Quashing a False 498A IPC Case on 02.03.2023: Grounds for Quashing 498a FIR-Misuse of Section 498A and the Importance of Specific Allegations

The Article is based on the Recent decision of Karnataka High Court: Raghavendra G vs State By Karnataka on 2 March, 2023

Case Summary: Quashing a False 498A IPC Case on 02.03.2023: Grounds for Quashing 498a FIR

The petitioners have approached the court to challenge the proceedings in Crime No. 24 of 2020, registered for various offenses under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The offenses include Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 114 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Brief Facts of the Case: Quashing a False 498A IPC Case on 02.03.2023: Grounds for Quashing 498a FIR

The second respondent is the complainant, and the petitioners are accused numbers 1 to 4. The marriage between the first petitioner and the second respondent took place on May 20, 2013, while the first petitioner was serving in the Indian Army. However, the relationship between the petitioners turned sour, leading the first petitioner to file a petition seeking annulment of the marriage.

After the petition for annulment was filed, the second respondent registered a complaint on September 18, 2020, alleging offenses against the first petitioner, as well as the mother-in-law, father-in-law, and a distant relative of the complainant. The police conducted an investigation and filed a charge sheet.

Contention of Parties: Quashing a False 498A IPC Case on 02.03.2023: Grounds for Quashing 498a FIR

The counsel for the petitioners argues that there is no allegation that qualifies as an offense under Section 498A of the IPC. They assert that the marriage took place in 2013, while the first petitioner was serving in the Indian Army and would intermittently visit the second respondent. They argue that no prior complaints were registered before the petitioner filed for the annulment of the marriage.

On the other hand, the counsel representing the second respondent refutes the submissions and claims that the first petitioner has consistently harassed the wife, particularly during her stay in Delhi. They argue that the petitioners should be held accountable for the alleged harassment.

Referred Case Laws: Quashing a False 498A IPC Case on 02.03.2023: Grounds for Quashing 498a FIR

The court cites the judgment in the case of KAHKASHAN KAUSAR @ SONAM AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS, where the Supreme Court expresses concern over the misuse of Section 498A of the IPC and the tendency to implicate relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes. The court emphasizes the need for specific allegations and warns against proceeding with cases based on general omnibus allegations.

The case reference mentioned in the article, KAHKASHAN KAUSAR @ SONAM AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS, is helpful in quashing the false 498A IPC case because it provides guidance on how to deal with cases involving general omnibus allegations and the misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

In this particular case, the court refers to the judgment in KAHKASHAN KAUSAR @ SONAM AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS to emphasize that allegations made in matrimonial disputes should not be treated lightly and that specific allegations need to be made against the accused. The court highlights the court's concern over the misuse of Section 498A and the tendency to implicate relatives of the husband without proper evidence.

By citing this case law, the court indicates that the allegations made in the present case are general and lack specific details against the accused. It also suggests that the complaint may have been filed as a counterblast to the husband's proceedings for annulment of marriage. The court, considering the principles laid down in the referred case, concludes that there is no prima facie case against the petitioners and continuing with the proceedings would amount to harassment and abuse of the legal process.

In summary, the case reference is helpful in supporting the argument that the false 498A IPC case lacks specific allegations and falls within the category of general omnibus allegations, which should not be entertained by the court. It strengthens the petitioners' case for quashing the false case based on the misuse of Section 498A IPC.

Court's Opinion and Decision: Quashing a False 498A IPC Case on 02.03.2023: Grounds for Quashing 498a FIR

After considering the submissions and examining the material on record, the court finds that the relationship between the petitioners and the second respondent had deteriorated over time. The court observes that the complaint was filed in 2020, seven years after the alleged incidents occurred, and immediately after the husband filed for the annulment of the marriage. The court concludes that the complaint appears to be a counterblast to the husband's proceedings and suggests that it may be an abuse of the legal process.

The court also notes that except for general allegations of harassment, no specific allegations are made against petitioners 2 to 4 (the mother-in-law, father-in-law, and distant relative of the first petitioner). Considering the lack of substance in the allegations and the absence of a prima facie case against any of the petitioners, the court concludes that further proceedings would amount to harassment and abuse of the legal process.

The case was quashed based on the following grounds: Quashing a False 498A IPC Case on 02.03.2023: Grounds for Quashing 498a FIR

Time Gap: The complaint was filed seven years after the alleged incidents took place, which raised questions about the credibility and motive behind the complaint. The court considered it a clear case of the wife instituting proceedings as a counterblast to the husband's petition seeking annulment of marriage.

Omnibus Allegations: The allegations made against the accused (petitioners 2 to 4) were general and omnibus in nature, lacking specific and distinct allegations against them. The complaint failed to attribute any specific role to the accused in furtherance of the offense.

Misuse of Section 498A: The court acknowledged the increasing tendency to misuse Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to settle personal scores in matrimonial disputes. It emphasized the need to prevent the misuse of this provision, which was originally enacted to address cruelty against women.

Precedent: The court referred to various judgments, including the KAHKASHAN KAUSAR case, where the Supreme Court expressed concern over the misuse of Section 498A IPC and cautioned against proceeding against relatives and in-laws without specific allegations. The court followed the principle that general omnibus allegations should not lead to prosecution.

Based on these grounds, the court concluded that allowing further proceedings against the petitioners would amount to an abuse of the process of law and cause harassment to the accused. Therefore, the court quashed the proceedings.

Conclusion: Quashing a False 498A IPC Case on 02.03.2023: Grounds for Quashing 498a FIR

In this recent case, the court quashed the proceedings in a false 498A IPC case, highlighting the need to prevent the misuse of this provision. The case involved allegations of cruelty and dowry harassment against the husband and his relatives, but upon careful examination, the court found that the allegations were general and lacked specificity. The court raised concerns about the increasing tendency to misuse Section 498A IPC in matrimonial disputes, using it as a tool to settle personal scores.

The court emphasized that such general omnibus allegations should not lead to prosecution, especially when there is a significant time gap between the alleged incidents and the filing of the complaint. In this particular case, the complaint was lodged seven years after the events occurred, raising doubts about the credibility and motive behind the complaint. The court considered it a clear attempt to retaliate against the husband's petition seeking annulment of marriage.

In reaching its decision, the court also referred to various precedent-setting judgments that have expressed concern over the misuse of Section 498A IPC. These judgments have cautioned against proceeding against relatives and in-laws without specific allegations, highlighting the need to prevent the abuse of the process of law.

The court's decision to quash the proceedings in this case sends a strong message about the importance of maintaining the integrity of Section 498A IPC. It aims to discourage the filing of false and baseless complaints, protecting innocent individuals from unnecessary harassment and ensuring that the provision is used for its intended purpose of addressing genuine cases of cruelty against women.

This case serves as a reminder that while it is crucial to provide protection to victims of domestic violence, it is equally important to safeguard the rights of the accused and prevent the misuse of legal provisions. Striking a balance between these objectives is crucial for the fair and just administration of justice in cases involving matrimonial disputes.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023- No Substance in the allegations and No Material exists against the Husband and Five In-laws, Case Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 06 Mar 2023 11:25:00 +0000

498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023-No Substance in the allegations and No Material exists against the Husband and Five In-laws, Case Quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023- In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that the materials in the case diary and the chargesheet do not prima facie make out a case of cognizable offense against the husband and In-laws, and there is no material available in the present case to show the cruelty as defined under Section 498A of IPC was inflicted upon the wife by them. There is no substance in the allegations made by the wife in her petition of complaint and no material exists to prima facie make out a case against them, and there are no materials for the proceedings against them. Therefore, the entire criminal proceedings against the husband and In-laws are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

_________________________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023

According to the facts of this case, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 19.02.1995 as per Hindu rites, customs, and traditions, but after the marriage, several disputes cropped up between the husband and the wife.

It is stated that several disputes resulted in the filing of a series of legal proceedings by both husband and the wife against each other and their family members, and since 2015 the wife and the husband are living separately at their respective residences, however, the husband and the wife mutually decided to settle their disputes permanently.

It is also stated that in June 2015, the wife started to live with her parents, and on 24.03.2019, the husband and In-laws came to the wife’s house and started assaulting her, using slang and abusive language.

Case Brief- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023

Later, the wife submitted a petition of complaint dated 10.04.2019 under Section 156(3) of CrPC before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Durgapur, against her husband and In-laws, and as per the directions passed by the Magistrate, the criminal proceedings were initiated by the Police Station on 22.05.2019 under Section 498A/ 406/ 34 of IPC against the husband, mother-in-law, three brothers-in-law, and one married sister-in-law.

It is further stated that the investigating agency submitted the impugned chargesheet dated 31.08.2019 against the husband and In-laws in connection with the present case under Section 498A/ 406/ 34 of IPC.

Upon this, the husband and five In-laws have filed the present revision petition for quashing the chargesheet dated 31.08.2019 and the entire proceedings against them.

_________________________________________________

Read the latest Article- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023- Mere allegation of torture or dowry demand do not constitute offense against Husband & Five In-laws, Case Quashed.
498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023- Karnataka High Court – No Specific Allegations against the Children of the husband from the first marriage, F.I.R. Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

____________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband and In-laws submitted that the husband and the wife had both mutually decided to settle their disputes and to that effect, they both entered into an agreement in writing thereby inter alia resolving that the husband and the wife would apply for mutual divorce, and the husband would pay Rs. Eight Lakhs to the wife as permanent alimony in two installments.

It is also submitted that it was agreed between the husband and the wife that both of them would withdraw all the pending cases between them and their family members including the instant criminal proceedings against the husband and In-laws, and they both have filed an application for mutual divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the District court.

It is further submitted that in view of the amicable settlement arrived between the husband and the wife, the pendency of the instant criminal proceedings is redundant as it would be apparent that the wife has filed the petition of complaint out of misunderstanding, and that the husband and In-laws are not guilty of commission of any offense which requires them to stand trial in connection with the instant proceedings which would result in the miscarriage of justice.

Arguments- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023

It is also submitted that this is a fit case for the court to invoke its inherent power conferred upon this Hon’ble court under Section 482 of CrPC, and to prevent misuse of the process of law and to secure the ends of justice.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the chargesheet dated 31.08.2019 and instant criminal proceedings against the husband and five In-laws.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgement 10.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - Vague Allegations against the Sister-in-law and Another In-law. F.I.R Quashed.
498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023- Jharkhand High Court -General and Vague Allegations against the Mother-in-law, Case quashed.
_______________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023

Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.

Rajesh Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.

Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr.

Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr.

Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. and Anr.

G.V. Rao Vs. L.H.V. Prasad & Ors.

K. Subha Rao Vs. State of Telangana

Ramesh Chandra Gupta Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.

Vineet Kumar and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another

State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy

State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal

Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Prakash Singh Badal Vs. State of Punjab

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023

It is stated by the court that the wife returned to her parent's house in 2015, and no complaint was filed from 2015 to 2019, and according to the present case only one incident took place on 24.03.2019, that is the husband and In-laws came to the wife’s house and assaulted her and used slang language, but the present case has been filed without attaching any medical papers to substantiate the allegation of assault.

It is also stated that in the case of section 498A, the high court can quash the proceedings if the court is convinced that the accused person is innocent and is falsely implicated, and it can also be done if the ingredients of the alleged offense are not proved, and in the present case there is no material to show that cruelty, as defined in Section 498A of IPC, was inflicted upon the wife.

By referring to one of the above-mentioned cases, the court stated that Section 498A was inserted with the object of punishing cruelty at the hands of the husband or his relatives against the wife, especially when such cruelty could result in the suicide or murder of the woman. But most of the complaints under this section are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues, and many of the complaints are not bona fide, and at the time of filing of the complaint, implications, and consequences are not seen by the person filing the complaint, and it results in uncalled harassment not only to the accused person but also to the person who filed the complaint, and uncalled arrest can ruin the chances of settlement.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023

It is further stated by the court that upon consideration of relevant circumstances and in absence of any specific role attributed to the accused person, it would be unjust if the accused is forced to go through the trial, and a criminal trial leading to an eventual acquittal also inflicts several severe scars upon the accused person, and such exercise must be discouraged.

Furthermore, it is stated by the court that the materials in the case diary and the chargesheet do not prima facie make out a case of cognizable offense against the husband and In-laws, and there are no materials for proceedings against them towards the trial and the present case is a fit case where the inherent powers of the court can be exercised.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that the ultimate test is whether the allegations have any substance, and in the present case there is no substance in the allegations and no material exists to prima facie make out a case against the husband and In-laws, and so the proceedings in the present case should be quashed in the interest of justice.

Therefore, the petition is allowed and the proceedings against the Husband and Five In-laws are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash after charge sheet 19.09.2022- Bombay High Court-Omnibus and general allegations against Sister-in-law. FIR Quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 11.11.2022- Calcutta High Court- Unwarranted Proceedings against the Parents-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

_____________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 01.03.2023

In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that there is no material available in the present case to show the cruelty as defined under Section 498A of IPC was inflicted upon the wife by the husband and In-laws, and the materials in the case diary and the chargesheet do not prima facie make out a case of cognizable offense against the husband and In-laws.

It is also held that there are no materials for the proceedings against the husband and In-laws, there is no substance in the allegations made by the wife in her petition of complaint and no material exists to prima facie make out a case against them.

Therefore, the proceedings against the Husband and Five In-laws are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Discharge Judgment 01.03.2023- Mere allegation of torture or dowry demand do not constitute offense against Husband & Five In-laws, Case quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 03 Mar 2023 09:27:00 +0000

498A Discharge Judgment 01.03.2023- Mere allegation of torture or dowry demand do not constitute offense against Husband & Five In-laws, Case Quashed.

498A Discharge Judgment 01.03.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023- In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that mere allegation of demand of dowry, and further torture upon the wife for non-fulfillment of dowry demand would not constitute an offense under Section 498A of IPC unless it is shown prima facie that such unlawful demand or cruelty has pushed the wife to her limits, and the complaint filed by the wife does not constitute a strong prima facie case against the husband and In-laws. The complaint filed by the wife is a result of only a concoction and afterthought of the plan of action, the wife has emerged to fulfill personal vengeance against the husband and In-laws, and the criminal proceedings against them appear to be a gross abuse of the process of the court, and it is not free from the malice. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the Husband and Five In-laws are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

_________________________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

According to the facts mentioned in the complaint filed by the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 23.11.2005 and after the marriage, the wife started living in her matrimonial home with her husband and In-laws.

It is stated that the wife has been subjected to immense mental torture by her husband and in-laws and her husband started living separately from her in some other place and left the newly wedded wife to stay alone amongst the In-laws.

It is also stated that the In-laws including the wife’s married sister-in-law demanded money from the wife, pressurized her, and subjected her to abusive language and humiliation so that the wife brings the money from her parents, as well as the husband inflicted torture on the wife on demand of more dowry.

Case Brief- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

It is further stated that at the time of the marriage, the husband and In-laws were provided the dowry in form of various valuable gifts and a huge amount of cash by the parents of the wife, and the father of the wife gifted the wife various valuable properties as her stridhan properties, and the husband and In-laws have deprived the wife of the enjoyment of the said properties.

Furthermore, it is stated that the stridhan properties of the wife of which only she is the lawful owner have not been returned to her by the husband and In-laws, and due to the severe torture and unbearable situation created by the husband and In-laws in the matrimonial home, the wife was forced to leave her matrimonial home, and from the month of July 2006 she has been virtually living separately from her husband and In-laws.

Upon this, the wife filed a complaint case dated 29.08.2015 in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Burdwan for the offense punishable under Sections 498A, 406, 506, and 34 of IPC against the husband and five In-laws.

Case Brief- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

Later, the trial court took cognizance of the offense alleged against the husband and In-laws and initiated the proceedings against them. The wife was examined under Section 200 of CrPC in the trial court, and on the basis of the same, the summons was issued to the husband and In-laws, but when they appeared in the court, they were granted bail, and later on, they preferred to file their prayer for discharge. The prayer filed by the husband and in-laws was disposed of by the trial court by the order dated 10.08.2016 and rejected their prayer for discharge.

The husband and In-laws have filed the present petition with the prayer to invoke provisions under Section 482 of CrPC, to quash the entire said proceedings against them.

_________________________________________________

Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- Kerala High Court - General and Non-Specific Allegations against the Sister-in-law, Proceedings Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

____________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband and In-laws submitted that the present case against the husband and In-laws is only an outcome of vengeance and malice by the wife who has not ever been successful in her several endeavors to victimize the husband and In-laws.

It is also submitted that there are no sufficient materials in the present case against the husband and In-laws to proceed against them. The proceedings now pending in the trial court against the husband and In-laws are only a gross abuse of the process of the court.

It is further submitted that the wife has voluntarily left her matrimonial home much before the date of filing of the complaint, and the fact that the court in a proceeding under Section 125 of CrPC has already categorically held the fact of voluntarily leaving the wife from her matrimonial home is a very relevant fact to maintain in any criminal case for an offense under Section 498A against the husband and In-laws which the wife has intentionally suppressed in the trial court.

Arguments- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

Furthermore, it is submitted that in the complaint, the wife has also suppressed the fact about the pendency of two suits which the first is a title suit pending in the civil court, Burdwan and the second is a matrimonial suit pending in the district court, Hooghly. The first suit is pending for claiming the return of the money of amount of Rs One lakh from the father of the wife to the husband which her father took earlier from the husband but later denied to pay back, and the second suit was preferred by the husband seeking dissolution of his marriage with the wife by a decree of divorce.

It is also submitted that a proceeding initiated by the wife in an appropriate court under Section 125 of CrPC for maintenance has also been dismissed by the said court on the ground that the wife was not able to prove satisfactorily as to her indigence and vagrancy, instead, it was proved that the wife has voluntarily left her matrimonial home.

He also submitted that all these facts are very relevant for the trial court before taking cognizance of the complaint filed by the wife against the husband and In-laws, which the trial court has failed to take note of, or it was suppressed from the trial court, and so the complaint filed by the wife is a sum-total of fraudulent misrepresentation to warrant only its rejection.

Arguments- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

He further submitted that the marriage between the wife and her husband took place on 23.11.2005, whereas the wife left her matrimonial home in July 2006, and since thereafter the wife sat tight and has not come up with any allegation of torture, dowry demand, etc. and only in the year 2015, the wife filed the present complaint dated 29.08.2015 without any explanation as to the reason of delay in filing the said complaint, and hence it is liable to be rejected.

Furthermore, it is submitted that the crux of the dispute between the wife, husband, and In-laws is mainly due to the alleged non-payment of an amount of Rs One Lakh taken by the father of the wife from the husband, and the nature of the dispute is only civil and there is no scope for the criminal justice system to solve the said matter.

It is also submitted that the mother-in-law is an octogenarian person, whereas two out of the five In-laws are residents of different states, and accordingly, these In-laws had not and could not contribute to the alleged offense due to their lack of proximity to the matrimonial home of the wife, and they could not have played any role and the allegations against them are frivolous.

Arguments- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

It is further submitted that the statements made in the complaint by the wife, even if taken at their face value and accepted in entirety, the said statements would not prima facie constitute any offense or make out any case against the husband and five In-laws, and no prudent person could reach on the basis of the same to a conclusion that there is sufficient ground to proceed against the husband and In-laws, and the entire proceedings are only malafide and malicious.

Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of the proceedings against the husband and five In-laws.

On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife submitted that the offense alleged against the husband and In-laws is a continuing offense and the point of belated filing of the complaint would not render the right of the wife, and in so far as the wife has been able to successfully put forward the sufficient materials against the husband and In-laws in support of the alleged facts and circumstances of the present case.

Arguments- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

It is also submitted that the complaint filed by the wife is enough elaborate regarding the modes and manner in which the husband and In-laws have inflicted torture upon the wife during her matrimonial life, and thus the trial court has directed itself rightly in weighing and assessing the credibility of the statements made in the complaint, and a prima facie case has been made out against the husband and In-laws from there.

It is further submitted that in view of the prima facie offense being made out against the husband and In-laws in the complaint, the only course of action left upon the trial court is to issue a process to the husband and In-laws under section 204 of CrPC, and after the examination of the wife under section 200 of CrPC, and finding prima facie materials against the husband and In-laws, the provisions under section 203 of CrPC would not have come into play in the present case.

It is also submitted that the application filed by the husband and In-laws in the trial court is improper and erroneous, and the prayer made by them in the same is more of a nature under Section203 of CrPC than that under Section 227 of CrPC, and their present case is not based on sufficient grounds to warrant the present court’s interference, in the exercise of its inherent power.

Therefore, it is prayed that the petition filed by the husband and five In-laws shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgement 15.09.2022- Telangana High Court - Vague allegations against Parent-in-law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgment 14.09.2022- Bombay High Court-No specific allegations against parents-in law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR quashed.
_____________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu (dead) by LRS Vs. Jagannath (dead) by LRS & Ors.

Hamza Haji Vs. State of Kerala & Anr.

Dalip Singh Vs. State of U.P.

Kishan Singh (dead) through LRS Vs. Gurpal Singh & Ors.

Robert John D’Souza & Ors. Vs. Stephen V. Gomes & Anr.

Suresh Vs. Mahadevappa Shivappa Danannava & Anr.

Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia & Ors. Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre & Ors.

State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors.

Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr.

Inder Mohan Goswami & Anr. Vs. State of Uttaranchal & Ors.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

It is stated by the court that in the present case, the court is invited to invoke its inherent and extraordinary jurisdiction under provisions of Section 482 of CrPC, which the court is empowered to exercise to prevent abuse of process of any court or to secure the ends of the justice, and in several cases, the constitutional courts including the Hon’ble Apex Court have elaborated regarding the appropriate situations as to when and in what manner the court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction as stated above.

By referring to one of the above-mentioned cases, the court also stated that the inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC have to be exercised carefully, sparingly, and with great caution and only when such exercise is justified to be exercised by the tests specifically laid down in the said section itself, and the authority of the court exists for securing and advancement of justice, and if any abuse of process is leading to injustice, then the court would be justified in preventing injustice by invoking its inherent power in absence of any specific provisions in the statute.

It is further stated by the court the power vested in the court is to exercise its discretion and to interfere in the criminal proceedings which have been initiated not considering the fact that the person who filed the complaint has not disclosed any prima facie ingredient of offense against the accused person and that the complaint has not been made out a prosecutable case against the accused.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

It is also stated by the court that after careful consideration of the complaint filed by the wife, it appears that the wife has alleged infliction of torture, cruelty, and rude behavior by the husband and In-laws towards her after the marriage and when she was living in the matrimonial home.

It is further stated that in the long complaint, the wife has not mentioned an incident of torture which might have driven her to extremes of committing suicide, etc., and the court is constrained to find that mere allegation of demand of dowry or torture, and further torture upon the wife for non-fulfillment of dowry demand would not constitute an offense under Section 498A of IPC unless it is shown prima facie that such unlawful demand or cruelty has pushed the wife to her limits.

Furthermore, it is stated by the court that during all this period, the wife has been very conscious about her rights in her matrimonial life, she has filed a case for maintenance, recovery of stridhan properties, and fighting a case for divorce, but on contrary, the complaint reveals that the wife has simply avoided mentioning any incident or development post her leaving the matrimonial home.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

The court also stated that the wife was duty bound to come with clean hands to let the trial court know about the actual background of the case in order to come to a proper finding related to the maintainability but the wife has failed to do so, and it is also not on record as to what aggravating condition and circumstances have prompted the wife to lodge the instant complaint and made the allegations regarding 10 years old facts when she has never found it proper to come up with the same at any point during this period before filing this complaint.

It can be considered as a fair attribute to the probability that the complaint filed by the wife is a result of only a concoction and afterthought of a plan of action, the wife has emerged to fulfill personal vengeance against the husband and In-laws.

The court further stated that as far as an offense under Section 406 of IPC is concerned, the wife has to show prima facie ingredients of the offense of criminal breach of trust in accordance with section 405 of IPC, in the present case, however, it is on record that in the proceeding initiated by the wife under Section 94 of CrPC pending in the court of judicial magistrate, all the stridhan properties have already been seized by the police, in connection with the said case, and this fact was also not disclosed by the wife in her complaint, and no prima facie ingredients have been established by the wife.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

By referring to another one of the above-mentioned cases, the court also stated that when a person comes into the court to seek relief with unclean hands and tries to obtain relief by playing fraud on the court, then the court should be free to exercise its discretionary power in the prevention of the same, and a person who approaches the court is bound to produce all the relevant documents, and if he withholds a vital document to gain an advantage, then he will be guilty of playing fraud on the court as well on the opposite party.

Furthermore, it is stated by the court that the points raised by the wife in the present case are mainly technical in nature, and it should come into consideration only after satisfaction regarding the wife establishing sufficient facts and materials in the complaint constituting a strong prima facie case, and since the complaint filed by the wife lacks the same, there is no scope to even consider the points of arguments made on behalf of the wife.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that the criminal proceedings against the husband and five In-laws appear to be a gross abuse of the process of the court, and the same is not free from the malice or personal vengeance of the wife, so it is not eligible to proceed any further.

Therefore, the complaint case and all the proceedings against the husband and five In-laws are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 04.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - No Specific Allegations against Three In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023- No Judicial Mind Applied by the Magistrate before passing Summoning order, Proceedings against the Husband Quashed.

____________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Discharge Judgement 01.03.2023

In this article, Calcutta High Court held that the wife was duty bound to come with clean hands to let the trial court know about the actual background of the case in order to come to a proper finding related to the maintainability, but the wife has failed to do so, and the complaint filed by the wife is a result of only concoction and afterthought of a plan of action, the wife has emerged to fulfill personal vengeance against the husband and In-laws.

It is also held that no prima facie ingredients have been established by the wife against the husband and In-laws, and the points raised by the wife in the present case are mainly technical in nature, and it should come into consideration only after satisfaction regarding the wife establishing sufficient facts and materials in the complaint constituting a strong prima facie case, but the complaint filed by the wife fails to do the same.

Therefore, the complaint case and all the proceedings against the husband and five In-laws are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

D.V. Act Judgements in favor of Husband -No Domestic Violence - Wife not entitled to use Section 22 of D.V. Act as a weapon to gain compensation.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 28 Feb 2023 12:36:00 +0000

D.V. Act Judgements in favor of Husband -No Domestic Violence – Wife not entitled to use Section 22 of D.V. Act as a weapon to gain compensation.

D.V. Act Judgements in favor of Husband

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband – In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that there is no prima facie case of domestic violence against the husband and there is no ground for passing an order directing the husband to pay compensation as there are no mental injuries, torture or emotional distress, abuse caused by the acts of domestic violence by the husband. The wife is not entitled to use Section 22 as a weapon to gain compensation, and she is not entitled to any compensation and alternative accommodation charges. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the husband are hereby quashed.

⚠️ Facing a Matrimonial Case? Check Your Case in 2 Minutes

Whether it's a 498A FIR, Domestic Violence case, Maintenance claim, or Divorce dispute, taking the wrong step early can damage your case permanently.

Get a quick case evaluation based on your situation before you take your next step.

✔ FIR registered or notice received?
✔ Case already filed in court?
✔ Facing 498A / DV / Maintenance issues?
✔ Need urgent legal direction?

👉 Check Your Case Now (Free – 2 Minutes)

*Your details remain confidential. Only serious case evaluations are reviewed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband

According to the facts mentioned in the case, the husband retired as a Stenographer grade-I from the office of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata on 30.11.2018, and he is now suffering from Parkinson's disease and cervical spondylosis, and he is under continuous medical surveillance.

It is stated that the wife has been mounting pressure on the husband to stay separate from his elder brother since her marriage and the wife became violent and started mentally torture on the husband’s elder brother as well.

It is also stated that the wife left her matrimonial home in July 1998 and went to her father’s house stating that if the husband wants to lead a conjugal life with her, he will have to leave his elder brother and his ancestral home.

Facing a Domestic Violence case? Get structured legal strategy and drafting support.

Request Consultation

Case Brief- D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband

It is further stated that on 13.10.1998, the wife started abusing the husband and the next day the elder brother of the wife arrived at the ancestral house and started assaulting the mentally retarded elder brother of the husband, and this incident was reported to the police by the husband, and the Gram Panchayat called the husband and wife for settlement of the dispute.

It is also stated that after that the wife returned to her matrimonial home in January 1999 and became pregnant on 20.04.1999 and on 05.12.1999 the couple was blessed with a child, but the wife left her matrimonial home along with all her belongings on 27.03.2000.

Upon this, the husband wrote a letter to Legal Aid Services, West Bengal for the return of the wife to her matrimonial home, and he arranged rental accommodation as per the direction of Legal Aid Services, and on 17.01.2001, the wife with her child came to the house of the husband and requested him to forget the past, and promised to lead a normal life in presence of her maternal uncle-in-law, and later, on 13.04.2001 the parents of the wife came to the house of the husband and abused him for staying in his ancestral home.

Case Brief- D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband

Furthermore, it is stated that the wife lodged a case under Section 498A/ 34 of IPC in the police station on 23.04.2001 against her husband and his elder brother, and a final report was submitted, and on getting the notice of the final report, the husband filed a protest petition before the Magistrate, and the husband and his elder brother were discharged under Section 245(2) of CrPC on 19.05.2005 as no prima facie case was found against them.

Later, the wife filed a maintenance case under Section 125 of CrPC against her husband, and both the wife and her minor child were awarded maintenance of Rs 2000 in total.

The wife also filed another complaint under Section 12 of the D.V. Act, 2005 in the year 2013, after leaving her matrimonial home just after four months of her stay with the husband during 15 years of the marriage, and the wife contended that the husband had earned Rs.45000 from his service, but she had no source of income of her own, and at the house of her parents there is no space for her and her minor child, and she prayed for the return of her stridhan articles, and a monetary relief of Rs 50,000 for the education and medical expenses of her minor child, and also Rs. 20,000 for her and her child as maintenance per month.

Need help drafting reply to DV Act application?

Get Drafting Assistance

Case Brief- D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband

The Magistrate dismissed the case on finding that the wife has failed to specify the exact date on which the husband deprived the wife and her minor daughter of food and clothing and tortured them mentally and physically, and she failed to produce any documentary evidence.

The wife challenged the order of dismissal by filing an appeal petition before the Sessions Judge, Howrah, in which the court directed the husband to pay monetary aid and compensation of Rs.25,000 per month and Rs.7,000 per month for rental accommodation to the wife from the date of filing of the petition and also directed the husband that maintenance amount given under Section 125 of CrPC has to be deducted from the amount and to clear off the amount of arrear in three equal installments.

Upon this, the husband has filed the present revisional application in order to set aside the impugned order dated 14.08.2019 passed by the Sessions Judge against him.

_________________________________________________

Read the Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023- Gujarat High Court – False Allegations against the Husband and Six In-laws, FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023- Jammu and Kashmir High Court – No Specific Allegation against the Mother-in-law, FIR Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

__________________________________________________________

Arguments- D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband explained the provision of Section 3 of the Domestic Violence Act and submitted that in this case the appeal court has not considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case and passed the impugned order without proper assessment of the evidence, and awarded the reliefs of compensation and alternative accommodation to the wife.

It is also submitted that the wife in her evidence had stated that she had no receipt related to stridhan articles and the husband has denied during the cross-examination of the wife of taking a huge amount of cash and bhories of gold ornaments and furniture as dowry.

It is further submitted that there is no evidence related to the allegation against the husband’s elder brother that he used to ill behave with the wife in absence of the husband as the wife has admitted that since there was no other family member in her In-law's house, the husband told her to stay at her parent’s house for popper care of the baby, and this fact has not been taken into consideration by the sessions judge by applying his judicial mind.

Effective cross-examination requires preparation and strategy.

Consult for Strategy

Arguments- D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband

It is also submitted that the wife has failed to specify the exact dates on which the husband deprived her of food and clothing and committed torture upon her, and the wife had admitted to regularly receiving maintenance amount as per the order of the court and has even received Rs.5,000 for puja contingency from the husband, and this fact was also not considered, and the impugned order dated 14.08.2019 is illegal per-se.

Furthermore, it is submitted that the wife has stated that she has no income of her own but during her cross-examination, she admitted the fact that she joined a company on no work no pay basis to run the educational expenses of her daughter who was pursuing her study in class 12th, and she had an average income of Rs.5,000-6,000 per month, but the wife did not intimate to the court about her employment.

It is also submitted that the wife had left her matrimonial home out of her own volition and the application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is not applicable as it was filed without verification as required under Rule 6 read with Form III of the protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Rules, so the application which is not being duly verified as required under Rule such application is not maintainable.

Therefore, he prayed for setting aside the impugned order dated 14.08.2019 passed by the Sessions Judge against the husband.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023- Karnataka High Court – No Specific Allegations against the Children of the husband from the first marriage, F.I.R. Quashed.

498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023- No Judicial Mind Applied by the Magistrate before passing Summoning order, Proceedings against the Husband Quashed.

____________________________________________________________

Referred Judgements- D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband

Aditya Anand Vs. State of West Bengal

Shalu Ojha Vs. Prashant Ojha

Court’s Opinion- D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband

It is stated by the court that according to the face value of the evidence in the background of the facts discussed in this case, there is no prima facie case of domestic violence as defined under Section 3 of the D.V. Act, and the application under Section 12 of DV Act filed by the wife in 2013, with the allegation that she was subjected to mental and physical violence cannot be viewed readily on the finding that she has left her matrimonial home out of her own volition.

It is also stated that the court is of the view that the appeal court has errored in law and was swayed by emotion while awarding alternative rental accommodation and compensation per month to the wife as the husband cannot be held guilty of committing any domestic violence according to the facts of the present case.

It is further stated by the court that there is no observation made in the evidence or in the order related to the allegation that the elder brother of the husband had a bad eye on the minor child, and the wife has admitted that since the death of her mother-in-law, the elder brother of the husband was suffering from depression and was mentally retarded and so the allegation of his ill-behavior towards the wife is not acceptable.

Court’s Opinion- D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband

It is also stated by the court that there was no ground for passing an order directing the husband to pay compensation as there are no mental injuries, torture or emotional distress, or abuse caused by the acts of domestic violence by the husband, and the wife was not entitled to use Section 22 of DV Act as a weapon to gain compensation, and she was also not entitled to an amount of Rs.7,000 on account of rental charges for alternative accommodation, as the husband is ready to live together.

In view of the above discussion it was held that the court is unable to agree with the grant of reliefs given by the appeal court, and there was no justification on the part of the appeal court to grant compensation of Rs.25,000 payable to the wife every month. But if the daughter is pursuing higher studies, all expenses for her education have to be given by the husband.

Therefore, the revisional application is allowed, and the impugned order dated 14.08.2019 passed by the Sessions Judge against the husband is hereby set aside.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgment 14.09.2022- Bombay High Court-No specific allegations against parents-in law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 15.09.2022- Telangana High Court - Vague allegations against Parent-in-law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

______________________________________________________________

Legal Strategy & Drafting Services

Get professional assistance for matrimonial litigation strategy, legal drafting, and case planning.

Consultation on Case Strategy

Structured legal strategy planning for ongoing matrimonial disputes.

Consultation & Document Analysis

Detailed review of FIR, complaints, and legal documents.

FIR & DV Case Review for Quashing

Assessment of legal grounds for quashing proceedings.

Quashing Petition Drafting

Preparation of petitions under Section 482 CrPC.

Discharge Application Drafting

Drafting applications to challenge weak prosecution cases.

Reply Drafting (DV / Maintenance)

Preparation of replies for DV Act and maintenance cases.

Written Arguments Preparation

Structured legal arguments for court proceedings.

Complaints / RTI / Appeals

Drafting and filing support for legal complaints and appeals.

Need help with your case?

Request Legal Consultation

Conclusion- D.V. Act Judgements in favor of the Husband

In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that there is no prima facie case of domestic violence against the husband and the application under Section 12 of the DV Act filed by the wife with the allegation that she was subjected to mental and physical violence cannot be viewed readily on the finding that she has left her matrimonial home out of her own volition.

It was also held that there was no ground for passing an order directing the husband to pay compensation as there are no mental injuries, torture or emotional distress, or abuse caused by the acts of domestic violence by the husband, and the wife is not entitled to compensation and alternative accommodation charges as the husband is ready and willing to live together with the wife and his daughter.

Therefore, the impugned order dated 14.08.2019 passed by the Sessions Judge against the husband is hereby set aside.

Related Matrimonial Legal Strategy Guides

498A Defense & FIR Quashing Strategy

Step-by-step legal strategy for defending false 498A cases, quashing FIR and trial approach.

Domestic Violence Case Defense Strategy

Detailed guide on DV Act replies, interim relief defense and litigation strategy.

Maintenance Case Defense (Section 125 CrPC)

Learn how to defend maintenance claims using evidence, cross-examination and Section 125(4).

Mutual Divorce Settlement Strategy

Strategic planning for alimony, custody, settlement negotiation and legal drafting.

About Our Expert – Matrimonial Litigation Strategy Specialist

Our Expert Advocate Sahil Kapoor, a legal practitioner focused on matrimonial dispute resolution, litigation strategy, and family law matters across India.

LL.B (Law Graduate) – Practicing Advocate
LL.M in Family Law & Social Security – Gold Medalist
Post Graduate Diploma in Family Therapy & Counseling
Advanced Diploma in Family Dispute Resolution – First Rank
Research Scholar (PhD) – Matrimonial Dispute Resolution
Trained in Mediation, Negotiation & Family Dispute Resolution

Instead of general legal advice, the approach is strategy-driven—helping individuals understand their legal position, avoid common mistakes, and plan their cases effectively.

Need help with your case strategy or legal drafting?

Request Consultation

498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023- Jammu and Kashmir High Court - No Specific Allegation against the Mother-in-law, FIR Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 25 Feb 2023 12:28:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023- Jammu and Kashmir High Court – No Specific Allegation against the Mother-in-law, FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023- In this article, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that there are no specific allegations against the mother-in-law, and nothing on record shows that she has subjected the wife to cruelty and harassment. In the absence of any specific allegations against the mother-in-law which disclose her active involvement, the magistrate has taken cognizance in a mechanical and routine manner against her. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the mother-in-law are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

_________________________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

According to the facts mentioned in the case, the marriage of the wife was arranged with the husband who had come from Canada to India to meet his parents, and the Roka ceremony between the wife and the husband took place on 19.06.2003.

It is stated that the husband started delaying the marriage on one or the other pretext and was insisting on performing a simple court marriage, and when the husband again came to India, the engagement or ring ceremony was solemnized on 04.11.2004.

It is also stated that the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 06.11.2004 in Jammu, and the marriage was registered with the Registrar of marriages, Jammu on 08.11.2004.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

It is further stated that after one week of the marriage, the husband left for Canada on 12.11.2004, and left the wife to stay behind for three months in Jammu during this period, the wife was appointed in a dental hospital and remained there till the completion of her visa formalities to go to Canada, and on 14.02.2005, the visa of the wife was approved for the USA, and she went to San Francisco.

It is also stated that the husband and the wife came to India on 18.01.2006 and 26.01.2006 respectively to attend the marriage of the wife’s brother which was scheduled on 02.02.2006, and after that, both husband and wife again left for the USA on 25.02.2006.

Later, the father of the wife lodged a complaint at the Police Station, Jammu on 15.06.2006, and on the said complaint an FIR was registered at the Women Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu for the offense punishable under Sections 498A, 109, 504, 506 of RPC against the mother-in-law of the wife.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

Upon this, a divorce petition was filed by the husband for dissolution of marriage with the wife in the court of San Francisco County Superior Court, USA, and the court passed the judgement and dissolved the marriage between the husband and the wife on 27.12.2006, and ordered the husband to pay 6000 dollars to the wife in two installments of 2000 and 4000, and the husband paid the amount in compliance to the court order.

On the basis of the said divorce judgement, the wife filed a suit for the declaration of the fact that the wife’s marriage with the husband stands dissolved by the virtue of judgement dated 27.12.2006 passed by the San Francisco County Superior Court, USA, with relief of permanent injunction restraining the husband and parents-in-law from creating obstacles in getting the name of the husband deleted from the record of the Register of Marriages and from the record of Passport Office, Jammu.

Later, on 03.11.2006, the wife filed a suit against the husband, mother-in-law, and a Branch Manager of a Cooperative Bank claiming that the jewelry lying in the bank is her property, and in this suit, a preliminary was passed, and a commissioner was appointed and was directed to get the property identified from the parties and hand over the items to the parties according to their belonging, and after the submission of report by the commissioner, a final decree was passed on 28.03.2007, and the husband and mother-in-law never raised any dispute regarding the property of the wife.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

After the investigation, a trial was started against the mother-in-law, and the Magistrate by its order dated 10.11.2008 directed the investigating officer to perform a re-investigation of the case, and submit the report on 15.12.2008, but instead of submitting the report, the investigating officer produced a challan dated 19.03.2009 against the mother-in-law.

The challan dated 19.03.2009 against the husband and mother-in-law is pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, and warrants under Section 512 of CrPC were issued against the husband, and the mother-in-law is facing the trial.

Upon this, the mother-in-law has filed the present petition under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing the impugned FIR, and the challan dated 19.03.2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, against her.

_________________________________________________

Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- Kerala High Court - General and Non-Specific Allegations against the Sister-in-law, Proceedings Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

___________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the mother-in-law submitted that the allegations leveled against the mother-in-law are totally malicious and baseless, and do not disclose any offense against them.

It is also submitted that the allegations made in the FIR, even if they are taken on their face value and accepted in entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offense or make out any case against the mother-in-law, and despite such facts, the mother-in-law has been harassed by the father of the wife by lodging the impugned FIR, who has now expired.

It is further submitted that the wife's father abused the process of law, only to wreak vengeance upon the mother-in-law, and to victimize her, stated the fact about the father-in-law's death, and explained the bedridden situation of the mother-in-law due to illness.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the impugned FIR, and the challan dated 19.03.2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, against the mother-in-law.

On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the Women Police Station opposed the petition filed by the mother-in-law and submitted that the present petition is not maintainable as it involves factual disputes which can only be decided by leading evidence and requires a full trial by the trial court.

It is also submitted that the father of the wife filed a written complaint for registration of FIR against the mother-in-law, and after receipt thereof, the women police station registered a case vide FIR for the commission of offenses punishable under Sections 498A, 109, 504, 506 of RPC.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

It is further submitted that during the investigation, a prima facie case has been made out against the mother-in-law, and so she has no legal right to seek quashing of the challan dated 19.03.2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate.

Therefore, it is prayed that the present petition filed by the mother-in-law shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgment 14.09.2022- Bombay High Court-No specific allegations against parents-in law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 15.09.2022- Telangana High Court - Vague allegations against Parent-in-law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

_____________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

Mirza Iqbal @ Golu & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. and Anr.

Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Ors.

Veena Mittal Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.

State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

It is stated by the court that the power under Section 482 of CrPC is exercised by the High Courts to prevent the abuse of the process of court and to secure the ends of justice, and this authority of the court exists for the advancement of justice, and if any attempt is made to abuse this authority, the court has the power to prevent such abuse. The inherent powers of the High Court are wide in scope, power, and higher the responsibility upon the authority having such power to exercise it with circumspection.

The court also stated that the advocate appearing on behalf of the mother-in-law restricted his arguments only to the legal issue that in the absence of any specific allegations against the mother-in-law which discloses her active involvement, the magistrate has taken cognizance in the mechanical and routine manner.

By referring to one of the above-mentioned cases, it is further stated by the court that allowing the prosecution, in the absence of any clear allegations against the In-laws will simply result in abuse of the process of the court.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

It has also been held in another one of the above-mentioned cases that at the time of filing of the complaint the allegations and consequences are not properly seen by the person filing the complaint that such a complaint can lead to a huge amount of agony, harassment, and pain to the person who filed the complaint, accused, and their close relations.

Furthermore, it is stated by the court that in a case where allegations made in the complaint, and the evidence collected in support of the complaint do not disclose the commission of any offense or make out a case against the accused person, the High Court has power under Section 482 of CrPC to quash the proceedings and the case against the accused.

The court also stated that upon perusal of the complaint in the present case, it can be seen that there are no specific allegations mentioned in the complaint against the mother-in-law, and according to the court, there is no ground to constitute an offense against the mother-in-law of subjecting the wife to cruelty, and most of the allegations in the complaint are directed by the wife against the husband with regard to dowry demand, and subjecting her to cruelty and harassment by having extramarital affair with another woman abroad.

In view of the above discussion, the petition is allowed, the impugned FIR and the challan dated 19.03.2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Jammu against the mother-in-law is hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 10.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - Vague Allegations against the Sister-in-law and Another In-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- Kerala High Court - General and Non-Specific Allegations against the Sister-in-law, Proceedings Quashed.

_______________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 22.02.2023

In this article, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that in the absence of any specific allegations against the mother-in-law which disclose her active involvement, the magistrate has taken cognizance in the mechanical and routine manner.

It is also held that there are no specific allegations against the mother-in-law, and there is nothing that shows that the mother-in-law has subjected the wife to cruelty and harassment.

Therefore, the impugned FIR and the challan dated 19.03.2009 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Jammu against the mother-in-law is hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023- Karnataka High Court - No Specific Allegations against the Children of the husband from the first marriage, F.I.R. Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 22 Feb 2023 11:41:00 +0000

498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023- Karnataka High Court – No Specific Allegations against the Children of the husband from the first marriage, F.I.R. Quashed.

498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023- In this article, the Karnataka High Court held that there are no specific allegations against the husband's children from the first marriage, and there is nothing that shows that how the children have contributed to the alleged physical and mental harassment of the wife. The court also held that the allegations against the children of the husband are vague in nature in the form of chargesheet and witnesses, and the present pending criminal case against them is liable to be terminated. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the children of the husband are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

________________________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

According to the facts mentioned in the complaint filed by the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 08.04.2006, and after the marriage, the wife started living in her matrimonial home with her husband and his children.

It is stated that after the marriage, the husband and his children started harassing the wife by saying that she is not good-looking and does not know how to manage the household work.

It is also stated that the husband and his children also taunted and harassed the wife by saying that she did not bring a proper dowry amount and did not give a car to them, and the husband and children demanded a car and additional gold from the wife.

Case Brief- 498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

Upon this, the wife filed a complaint dated 03.01.2021 at the police station for the offense punishable under sections 498A read with section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 1961 against the husband and his children.

The complaint was transferred to the Women Police Station, which registered a case against the husband and his children, and after the investigation, a chargesheet was filed against them, and later, the Magistrate took cognizance of the offense and started to proceed with the criminal case against the husband and his children.

The children of the husband have filed the present petition under Section 482 of CrPC to quash the proceedings and the chargesheet filed against them.

_________________________________________________

Read Latest Article- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 27.09.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court-No Specific Allegation made against Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.
498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023- No Judicial Mind Applied by the Magistrate before passing Summoning order, Proceedings against the Husband Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

____________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the children submitted that the wife's registration of a complaint against the children is illegal, and arbitrary and amounts to abuse of the process of courts and the law.

It is also submitted that the allegations against the children are common and omnibus, and the allegations regarding assault and demand of dowry are quite vague and are wild in nature, and the particular dates on which the incidents related to dowry demand took place are not disclosed by the wife.

It is further submitted that the perusal of the chargesheet and the statements of the witnesses clearly reveal that the neighbors, who were acquainted with the facts of this case, their statements were not recorded which proves that no such incident of assault, harassment, and demand of dowry took place.

Arguments- 498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

It is also submitted that the wife has implicated all the family members, and the allegations made against them are only some general and sweeping allegations, and because of the false case filed by the wife, the future and career of the children are at stake which is an abuse of process of law and will result in the miscarriage of justice.

Furthermore, it is submitted that the husband and the wife have appeared before the trial court, and have settled the matter by filing a compromise petition, and the wife has withdrawn her petition filed under the DV Act, and she is also ready to compromise the issue in the present case, therefore the entire proceedings against the children of the husband are liable to be quashed.

It is also submitted that even if the alleged allegations constitute an offense, then also there is no legal evidence collected against the children, and the proceedings initiated against them are not only unfair and unjust, but it is also not a proper use of the process of law.

Arguments- 498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

It is further submitted that it is the second marriage of the husband, and the children of the husband are from his first wife, and in the present case, the children do not have any role to play in the alleged ill-treatment of the wife.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the proceedings and the chargesheet against the children.

On the other hand, the advocates appearing on behalf of the state and the wife submitted that the investigating agency has collected sufficient materials to rope in the children of the husband also in the present case.

Arguments- 498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

It is also submitted that the court having regard to the scope of section 482 of CrPC cannot hold a mini-trial to find out whether the children of the husband had any role in the alleged harassment of the wife or not.

It is further submitted that the investigation agency has collected prima facie materials which will establish the nexus between the alleged harassment imparted to the wife.

Therefore, it is prayed that the petition filed by the children shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023- Gujarat High Court – No Commission of Offense disclosed against the Mother-in-law, FIR Quashed.

498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023- Jharkhand High Court -General and Vague Allegations against the Mother-in-law, Case quashed.

____________________________________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

Geeta Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P.

K. Subha Rao Vs. The State of Telangana

G.V. Rao Vs. L.H.V. Prasad

Inder Mohan Goswami & Another Vs. State of Uttaranchal & Others

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

It is stated by the court that upon perusal of the materials on record, it is seen that the children of the husband are a son of 29 years and a daughter of 23 years, and both the children were born through the first wife of the husband, and after the death of the first wife, the husband married the present wife.

It is also stated by the court that after the death of the husband’s first wife, the husband married another girl and there is a matrimonial proceeding pending, and suppressing the said marriage, the husband is said to have married other 3–4 persons including the present wife, and therefore, it sought for action against the husband.

It is further stated by the court that the materials available from the chargesheet filed by the police after investigating the matter show that there are no specific allegations against the children of the husband, and there is nothing which shows that how the children have contributed to the alleged physical and mental harassment of the wife.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

Furthermore, it is stated by the court that the husband has married several people including the present wife, and how the children of the husband who are adults are responsible for the same is a question that has to be looked into in the present case.

The allegations against the children of the husband are vague in nature in the form of chargesheet and witnesses, and the children had no role in the action of the husband of marrying a number of people.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that the proceedings against the children of the husband in the present pending criminal case need to be terminated by quashing the chargesheet filed against them by exercising the power under Section 482 of CrPC.

Therefore, the petition filed by the children of the husband is allowed, and the proceedings against them are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash after Chargesheet 10.11.2022- Bombay High Court - No Specific and Precise allegations against the two In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 11.11.2022- Calcutta High Court- Unwarranted Proceedings against the Parents-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

____________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash after chargesheet 14.02.2023

In this article, the Karnataka High Court held that the allegations against the children of the husband are vague in nature in the form of chargesheet and witnesses, and the children had no role in the alleged physical and mental harassment of the wife.

It is also held that there are no specific allegations against the children of the husband, and there is nothing that shows how the children have contributed to the alleged physical and mental harassment of the wife.

Therefore, the FIR and the Proceedings against the Children of the husband are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement by Supreme Court—K. Subba Rao vs. State Of Telangana-Omnibus Allegations against Maternal Uncles of husband, Proceeding Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 17 Feb 2023 11:58:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement by Supreme Court—K. Subba Rao vs. State Of Telangana-Omnibus Allegations against Maternal Uncles of husband, Proceeding Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement by Supreme Court

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement by Supreme Court – In this article, the Supreme Court of India held that there are omnibus and general allegations made in the complaint filed by the wife against the maternal uncles of the husband, and a prima facie case is not being made against them for the proceedings under Sections 498A, 120B, 420 and 365 of IPC against them. The criminal proceedings are interdicted by the supreme court at the stage when there is an abuse of process of the court, and to secure the ends of the justice, the courts should be careful during the proceedings against distant relatives, and family members of the husband in crimes related to dowry deaths and matrimonial disputes. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the Maternal Uncles of the husband are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement by Supreme Court

According to the facts mentioned in the complaint filed by the wife, the marriage between the husband and the wife was solemnized on 08.12.2008, and after the marriage, both husband and wife were mostly residing in the United States of America.

It is stated that there was a marital discord between the wife and the husband, and the maternal uncles and other family members of the husband supported the husband.

It is also stated that the demand of dowry was made to the wife, and she was physically and mentally tortured by the husband, and the maternal uncles and other family members of the husband also conspired with the husband to kidnap the child from the custody of the wife and took the child away to the United States of America.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement by Supreme Court

Upon this, the wife filed a complaint at the police station, district Hyderabad on 20.12.2015 against her husband, In-laws, and maternal Uncles of her husband alleging that they harassed the wife and kidnapped her son from her custody, and on the basis of the complaint, an FIR was registered under Section 498A, 120B, 420, 365 of IPC at the Police Station on the same day.

Later, the Maternal Uncles of the husband filed a petition before the High Court under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing the proceedings, and the complaint filed by the wife, but the High Court dismissed the petition by its judgement dated 22.01.2016.

The Police were directed not to arrest the maternal uncles of the husband till the completion of the investigation, and after the completion of the investigation, a chargesheet dated 12.03.2017, and a supplementary chargesheet dated 20.12.2017 were filed under Sections 498A, 120B, 420, 365 of IPC against the husband, In-laws, and maternal uncles of the husband by the high court after disposal of the case.

Aggrieved by the judgement of the High Court by which the petition under Section 482 of CrPC filed by the maternal uncles was dismissed, then the maternal uncles of the husband have filed the present appeal petition for quashing the proceedings and the FIR against them.

_________________________________________________

Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- Kerala High Court - General and Non-Specific Allegations against the Sister-in-law, Proceedings Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

__________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement by Supreme Court

The advocate appearing on behalf of the maternal uncles submitted that upon perusal of the chargesheet, it discloses the fact that except for the bald statement of supporting the husband who was harassing the wife for dowry and conspiring with the husband for taking away his child to the United States of America, there is nothing else indicating that the maternal uncles were involved in the alleged crime.

Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of the proceedings and the FIR against the maternal uncles of the husband.

On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife submitted that certain documents belonging to the wife were seized from the maternal uncles, which would show their active involvement in the kidnapping of the wife’s child.

Therefore, it is prayed that the petition filed by the maternal uncles shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgment 14.09.2022- Bombay High Court-No specific allegations against parents-in law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 27.09.2022- Madras High Court-No Prima Facie material available against Parents-in-law and Sister-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.
_______________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement by Supreme Court

State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal

Kans Raj Vs. State of Punjab & Ors.

Kailash Chandra Agrawal and Anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement by Supreme Court

It is stated by the court that criminal proceedings are not normally interdicted by the supreme court at this stage unless there is an abuse of process of the court, and at the same time, the supreme court does not hesitate to interfere to secure the ends of the justice.

It is also stated that the courts should be careful during the proceedings against the distant relatives, and family members of the husband in crimes related to dowry deaths and matrimonial disputes, and the relatives and family members of the husband should not be roped in such cases on the basis of omnibus allegations unless there are some specific instances of their involvement are made out in the crime.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that on an overall consideration of the contents of the chargesheet dated 12.03.2017, supplementary chargesheet dated 2012.2017, and the submissions made on behalf of the wife, the court is of the opinion that the maternal uncles of the husband are not the immediate family members of the husband, and a prima facie case is not being made against them for the proceedings under Sections 498A, 120B, 420 and 365 of IPC.

Therefore, the appeal petition is allowed, and the proceedings against the maternal uncles of the husband are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 10.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - Vague Allegations against the Sister-in-law and Another In-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023- General and Non-specific Allegations against the Husband, Mother-in-law, and Sisters-in-law, FIR Quashed.

______________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement by Supreme Court

In this article, the Supreme Court of India held that the courts should be careful during the proceedings against the distant relatives, and family members of the husband in crimes related to dowry deaths and matrimonial disputes, and they should not be roped in such cases on the basis of omnibus allegations.

It is also held that the maternal uncles of the husband are not the immediate family members of the husband, there are only omnibus and general allegations made in the complaint filed by the wife against the maternal uncles of the husband, and a prima facie case is not being made against them.

Therefore, the proceedings against the Maternal Uncles of the husband are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023 - Allahabad High Court - No Specific Act defined In Complaint, The Order against the In-laws Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:03:00 +0000

498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023 – Allahabad High Court – No Specific Act defined In Complaint, The Order against the In-laws Quashed.

498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023- In this article, the Allahabad High Court held that the wife has leveled general allegations in the FIR without allegations of any specific act against the In-laws, and in the impugned summoning order passed by the magistrate, there is nothing which may indicate that the Magistrate has considered the facts of the case before passing the summoning order against the In-laws, the order clearly lacks application of reflection of judicial mind or discretion. The magistrate has not conducted any inquiry to satisfy himself that the allegations made in the complaint constitute an offense against the In-laws, and the order passed by the Magistrate is cryptic, and it does not stand the test laid down by the court. Therefore, the entire criminal proceedings against the In-laws are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023

According to the facts of this case, the wife has filed a complaint at the police station for the offense punishable under Sections 498A, 323 of IPC read with Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the In-laws.

Later, an FIR and a case were registered against the In-laws, and the Magistrate, Allahabad passed a summoning order dated 16.08.2022 against the In-laws, and the case is now pending in the court of Magistrate, Allahabad.

Upon this, the In-laws have filed the present application under Section 482 of CrPC to quash the summoning order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate as well as the entire proceedings against them.

_________________________________________________

Read the Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023- Gujarat High Court – False Allegations against the Husband and Six In-laws, FIR Quashed.
498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023- No Judicial Mind Applied by the Magistrate before passing Summoning order, Proceedings against the Husband Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

___________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the In-laws submitted that the summoning order dated 16.08.2022 in the present application is wholly arbitrary and is liable to be set aside by the court.

It is also submitted that the Magistrate has simply recorded a conclusion that on the basis of the complaint filed by the wife, the statements of the wife, and the statements of her witnesses, a prima facie offense under Sections 498A, 323 of IPC and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act appears to have been committed by the In-laws.

It is further submitted that the conclusion recorded by the Magistrate is not preceded by any discussion about the allegations made in the complaint by the wife or the statements of the wife and her witnesses, recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC.

Arguments- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023

It is also submitted that in the absence of any finding recorded by the Magistrate, on the basis of the allegations made in the complaint filed by the wife, the statement of the wife, and that of her witnesses, no prima facie satisfaction was recorded by the Magistrate for summoning the In-laws under Sections 498A, 323 of IPC and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Furthermore, it is submitted that the In-laws have been summoned by the Magistrate without any inquiry, and no findings have been recorded by the Magistrate regarding the manner of the alleged dowry demand, the quantum of the alleged dowry demand against the In-laws.

It is also submitted that the Magistrate has not considered the allegations made in the complaint by the wife regarding the commission of an offense under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and no material particulars regarding the same have been mentioned in the summoning order dated 16.08.2022 by the Magistrate, and the impugned summoning order is wholly arbitrary.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the summoning order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate and the entire proceedings against the In-laws.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023- Gujarat High Court – No Scope for proceedings against the Brother-in-law, FIR Quashed.
498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023- Jharkhand High Court -General and Vague Allegations against the Mother-in-law, Case quashed.
_____________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023

Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and Others Vs. State of Bihar

Mahboob and Others Vs. State of U.P. and another

Priyanka Srivastava and another Vs. State of U.P. and another

Smt. Shiv Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P. and another

Hariram Verma and four others Vs. State of U.P. and another

M/s. Pepsi Food Ltd. & another Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate & Others

S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Neeta Bhalla

Anita Malhotra Vs. Apparel Export Promotion Council

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023

It is stated by the court that every inquiry other than a trial which is conducted by the Magistrate or the court is an inquiry, and no specific manner or mode of the Inquiry is provided under Section 202 of CrPC, and the inquiry is done by the Magistrate for the purpose of deciding whether there is sufficient ground for the proceedings against the accused person or not.

It is also stated by the court that the Magistrate should at least mention in the summoning order about the prima facie satisfaction for summoning the In-laws, and the order passed by the Magistrate must reflect that he has exercised his jurisdiction in accordance with the law after satisfying himself about the prima facie allegations made by the wife in the complaint.

It is further stated that summoning an accused person to appear before the criminal court is a serious matter, and it affects the self-respect, dignity, and image of the accused in society, and this process of the criminal court should not be made a weapon of harassment, and the Magistrate cannot summon an accused person mechanically simply by writing that the statements of the person who filed the complaint and his witnesses are perused under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023

The court by referring to one of the above-mentioned cases also stated that at the stage of summoning an accused person, the Magistrate is not required to evaluate or examine the pieces of evidence, and he is not required to record the detailed reasons for summoning the said person, a brief order which can indicate the application of judicial mind is all that is expected from the Magistrate.

It is a settled law that at the time of issuing the process, the Magistrate is required to observe and check only the allegations in the complaint, and if the allegations made in the complaint or the chargesheet do not constitute an offense against the accused, then the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

It is also stated by the court that although it is not proper for the High Court to consider the defense of the accused person or to conduct an inquiry in respect of the merits of the allegations if the accused person has placed a document that is beyond any suspicion or doubt, and if it is considered that the allegations against the accused cannot stand, in such cases, in order to prevent abuse of process or injustice, it is important that the High Court shall look into the documents and grant relief to the concerned person by exercising their jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023

Furthermore, it is stated by the court that in the present case, the magistrate has not conducted any inquiry to satisfy himself that the allegations made in the complaint constitute an offense against the In-laws, and there is nothing on the record to show that the Magistrate has applied his mind to reach a prima facie conclusion.

The court also stated that the magistrate has passed a very cryptic order by simply saying that the statement of the wife as well as the statements of her witnesses which were recorded under Section 200 and 202 of CrPC are perused, and the In-laws are summoned, but such order is itself illegal which cannot stand the test of the law.

It is further stated by the court that in the impugned summoning order passed by the magistrate, there is nothing that may indicate that the Magistrate has considered the facts of the case before passing the summoning order against the In-laws, the order clearly lacks application of reflection of judicial mind or discretion, and such order cannot be accepted as a proper judicial legal order which is passed after following the due procedures of the law.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023

In view of the above discussion, the court held that it is clear that the wife has leveled general allegations in the FIR without allegations of any specific act against the In-laws, the impugned summoning order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate against the In-laws is cryptic, and the order does not stand the test laid down by the court.

Therefore, the present application is allowed, also the complaint case, and the impugned summoning order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate against the In-laws is hereby quashed, and the Magistrate is directed to pass a fresh order in the light of the observations made in this case.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash after Chargesheet 11.11.2022- Calcutta High Court- Unwarranted Proceedings against the Parents-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 10.11.2022- Bombay High Court - No Specific and Precise allegations against the two In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

_____________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 08.02.2023

In this article, the Allahabad High Court held that the magistrate has passed a very cryptic order by simply saying that the statement of the wife as well as the statements of her witnesses which were recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC are perused, and the In-laws are summoned, but such order is itself illegal which cannot stand the test of the law.

It is also held that the magistrate has not conducted any inquiry to satisfy himself that the allegations made in the complaint constitute an offense against the In-laws, and there is nothing on the record to show that the Magistrate has applied his mind to reach a prima facie conclusion.

Therefore, the complaint case and the impugned summoning order dated 16.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate against the In-laws are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023- Jharkhand High Court -General and Vague Allegations against the Mother-in-law, Case quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 10 Feb 2023 09:26:00 +0000

498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023- Jharkhand High Court -General and Vague Allegations against the Mother-in-law, Case quashed.

498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023- In this article, the Jharkhand High Court held that the Magistrate has passed a Summoning Order against the husband and the mother-in-law without applying the judicial mind, and as far as the mother-in-law is concerned, the proceedings against her are on the basis of vague and general allegations. There are general and omnibus allegations made in the complaint against the mother-in-law, and she has been falsely implicated in the case. Therefore, the criminal proceeding against the Mother-in-law is hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

According to the facts of this case, after the marriage between the wife and her husband, the wife started to reside in her matrimonial home with her husband and the mother-in-law.

It is stated that the husband is working in a transport department for the government of Jharkhand, and the mother-in-law is a government school teacher.

It is also stated that after one month of staying in the matrimonial home with the husband, and the mother-in-law, the wife filed a complaint petition for the offense under sections 498A, 325, 377, 406, 420, 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the husband and the mother-in-law.

Case Brief- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

A case was registered against the husband and the mother-in-law, and the magistrate took cognizance of the offense by passing a summoning order dated 20.07.2022 against the husband, and mother-in-law, and the case is pending before the Magistrate, Ranchi.

Upon this, the husband and the mother-in-law have filed an instant petition for quashing the entire criminal proceedings, including the summoning order dated 20.07.2022 taking cognizance against them.

_________________________________________________

Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- Kerala High Court - General and Non-Specific Allegations against the Sister-in-law, Proceedings Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

_____________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband and mother-in-law submitted that the general and omnibus allegations have been leveled against the husband and the mother-in-law.

It is also submitted that there is no allegation against the mother-in-law with respect to the offense under Sections 325 and 377 of IPC under which cognizance has been taken against the mother-in-law.

It is further submitted that the infirmity in the summoning order dated 20.07.2022 will be apparent from the fact that for more than one month the wife stayed in her matrimonial home with the mother-in-law, and only on a bad assertion made in the complaint petition filed by the wife, the mother-in-law has been roped in the present case.

Arguments- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

It is also submitted that the wife has stated in her complaint petition that she did not sustain any injury which required treatment, and therefore, no medical paper has been enclosed by her.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings, including the summoning order dated 20.07.2022 taking cognizance against the husband and the mother-in-law.

On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife submitted that there are materials available in the complaint petition filed by the wife against the mother-in-law, as well as in the statements and other inquiry witnesses.

Therefore, it is prayed that the instant petition filed by the husband and the mother-in-law shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgment 14.09.2022- Bombay High Court-No specific allegations against parents-in law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 27.09.2022- Madras High Court-No Prima Facie material available against Parents-in-law and Sister-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

_____________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

Kahkashan Kausar Vs. State of Bihar

K. Subha Rao Vs. State of Telangana

Pepsi Foods Ltd. Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

It is stated by the court that the court found force in the arguments on behalf of the husband and the mother-in-law regarding the false implication of the mother-in-law in the present case.

It is also stated by the court that it appears that the Magistrate has ordered the issuance of the process against the husband and the mother-in-law without applying the judicial mind, and as far as the mother-in-law is concerned, she has proceeded on the basis of vague and general allegations.

The court, by referring to one of the above-mentioned cases, stated that the courts should be careful in the proceedings against the distant relatives of the husband in the crimes pertaining to dowry deaths and matrimonial disputes.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

It was also stated that the relatives and family members of the husband should not be roped in such matrimonial disputes on the basis of omnibus allegations unless there are some specific instances made out of their involvement in the crime.

It was further stated by the court that in several instances the courts have expressed concerns over the misuse of Section 498A of IPC, and in the present time, there is an increased tendency of implicating the relatives and family members of the husband in matrimonial disputes without even analyzing the long-term consequences of a trial on the person who filed the complaint as well as on the accused person.

The court also stated that the false implications by the way of general and omnibus allegations made during the matrimonial disputes, if such allegations are left unchecked, would result in misuse of the process of the law.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

Therefore, the court by way of its judgement has warned the courts to be careful in the proceedings against the relatives, family members, and In-laws of the husband when no there is no prima facie case being made out against them.

Furthermore, the court stated that the summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter, and it is not that the person who filed the complaint has to bring only two witnesses to support the allegations that he made in the complaint, to set the criminal law in motion.

The summoning order passed by the magistrate must reflect that the magistrate has applied his judicial mind to the facts of the case, and the law applicable there, and the magistrate had to examine the nature of the allegations made against the accused in the complaint, and both oral and documentary pieces of evidence in support of such allegations, and then it would be sufficient for the person who filed the complaint to succeed in bringing the charge home to the accused person.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

The court also stated that the magistrate is not a silent spectator of the case at the time of recording the evidence before a summoning order against the accused is passed, the also magistrate has to carefully examine the evidence brought on the record.

The magistrate may even put questions to the person who filed the complaint, and his witnesses to know the truth about the allegations, and then the magistrate can examine if any prima facie offense has been committed by the accused person or not.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that after considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, the court is of opinion that the summoning order dated 20.07.2022 passed by the Magistrate is set aside and the entire criminal proceedings against the mother-in-law are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 10.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - Vague Allegations against the Sister-in-law and Another In-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023- General and Non-specific Allegations against the Husband, Mother-in-law, and Sisters-in-law, FIR Quashed.

____________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 06.02.2023

In this article, the Jharkhand High Court held that the Magistrate ordered the issuance of the process against the husband and the mother-in-law without applying the judicial mind, and as far as the mother-in-law is concerned, she has proceeded on the basis of vague and general allegations.

It is also held that there are general and omnibus allegations made in the complaint against the mother-in-law, and she has been falsely implicated in the case.

Therefore, the summoning order dated 20.07.2022 passed by the Magistrate, and the entire criminal proceedings against the mother-in-law, are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023- Gujarat High Court - No Scope for proceedings against the Brother-in-law, FIR Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 07 Feb 2023 13:06:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023- Gujarat High Court – No Scope for proceedings against the Brother-in-law, FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023- In this article, the Gujarat High Court held that in view of the settlement by the wife, and the judgement of acquittal of the husband and mother-in-law, there exists no scope for any further proceedings against the brother-in-law in the present case, and the continuance of proceedings against the brother-in-law would lead to wastage of judicial time as there remains no possibility of any conviction. The brother-in-law had no interaction with the wife for several years, and the allegations made in the impugned FIR against him would not survive. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the brother-in-law are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023

According to the facts of the case, the wife filed a complaint at the Police Station, Rajkot for the offenses punishable under Sections 498A and 114 of IPC against her husband, mother-in-law, and brother-in-law, an FIR was registered by the police against the husband, mother-in-law, and brother-in-law, and a case was registered against them.

It is stated that the matter between the wife, her husband, and the mother-in-law was settled by the Civil Judge and the Magistrate, Dhoraji, and it resulted in the divorce between the wife and the husband.

The brother-in-law has filed the present application under Section 482 of CrPC to quash and set aside the FIR and the proceedings against him.

_________________________________________________

Read Article- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- No Offense made out against the Father-in-law, Cousin Brother-in-law, Elder Brother-in-law & his Wife, FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023- Jharkhand High Court – No Offense made out against the Six In-laws, FIR Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

__________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the brother-in-law submitted that the brother-in-law had never resided with the wife and her husband since 2012, and the brother-in-law has his own permanent house in Mumbai, and therefore, he had no occasion to have any interaction with the wife.

It is also submitted that the wife has already settled the case with the husband and the mother-in-law, and the trial court, after observing the settlement, acquitted the husband and the mother-in-law from the case.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the FIR and the proceedings against the brother-in-law, as no case would survive against him.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023

On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife submitted that the matter is settled between the wife, her husband and the mother-in-law, which resulted in the divorce between the wife and the husband.

It is also submitted that the wife has no objection if the impugned FIR filed against the brother-in-law is quashed and set aside.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgement 15.09.2022- Telangana High Court - Vague allegations against Parent-in-law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

498A Quashing after Divorce 21.09.2022- Calcutta High Court- Non-Specific Allegations against Husband and In-laws. FIR Quashed.

_________________________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023

Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another

State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others

Geeta Mehrotra & Another Vs. State of U.P. and another

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023

It is stated by the court that on perusal of the records of the present case it appears that the brother-in-law is staying in Mumbai, and he is having his own residential house there for many years, and therefore, the allegations made in the impugned FIR would not survive.

It is also stated by the court that it is true that certain sections of the Indian Penal Code are non-compoundable and the other sections can be compounded with the permission of the court.

The court further stated that the power of the High Court in quashing an FIR or a criminal proceeding or complaint in the exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct, and it is different from the power given to the criminal courts for compounding the offenses under Section 320 of the code.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023

The court also stated that the High Courts must consider whether it would be contrary or unfair to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding when it would be tantamount to abuse of the process of law despite compromise and settlement between the victim and the wrongdoer, and whether to secure the justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end, and if the answer to these question is positive, then the High Court should be well within its jurisdiction to quash the proceedings.

Furthermore, the court by referring to one of the above-mentioned cases stated that if the FIR does not disclose any specific allegations against the accused person and more so against the co-accused person, especially in the matters arising out of matrimonial disputes, then it would be a clear abuse of judicial and legal process to send the accused persons to undergo the trial of the court.

It is a well-settled principle which is laid down in several cases that if the FIR does not disclose the commission of any offense, then the courts would be justified in quashing the criminal proceedings against the accused person, to prevent the abuse of process of law.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023

It is also stated by the court that in view of the settlement arrived between the wife, her husband and the mother-in-law, and the judgement of acquittal of the husband and the mother-in-law, there exists no scope for any further proceedings in the present case, and the continuance of proceedings against the brother-in-law would lead to wastage of judicial time as there remains no possibility of any conviction in this case.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that after considering the facts of the case, and the judgement of acquittal delivered, the court is of opinion that it is a fit case where the court can exercise its inherent power under Section 482 of CrPC to secure justice.

Therefore, the present application is allowed, and the impugned FIR and the proceedings against the Brother-in-law are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash after Chargesheet 22.09.2022- Chhattisgarh High Court- Vague allegations against Mother-in-law, Sister and Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 26.09.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court-Vague and bald allegations against Four In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

_____________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 01.02.2023

In this article, the Gujarat High Court held that the brother-in-law is staying in Mumbai, and he is having his own residential house there for many years, and he had no interaction with his wife for several years, and therefore, the allegations made in the impugned FIR against the brother-in-law would not survive.

It is also held that in view of the settlement by the wife, and the judgement of acquittal of the husband and the mother-in-law, there exists no scope for any further proceedings against the brother-in-law in the present case, and the continuance of proceedings against him would lead to wastage of judicial time as there remains no possibility of any conviction in this case.

Therefore, the impugned FIR and the proceedings against the Brother-in-law are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023- No Judicial Mind Applied by the Magistrate before passing Summoning order, Proceedings against the Husband Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 06 Feb 2023 13:40:00 +0000

498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023- No Judicial Mind Applied by the Magistrate before passing Summoning order, Proceedings against the Husband Quashed.

498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023- In this article, the Allahabad High Court held that the Magistrate did not apply the judicial mind before passing the summoning order and no inquiry was conducted to check whether a prima facie case has been made out against the husband or not. The Magistrate has passed a cryptic order simply by saying that the statement of the wife, as well as the statement of her witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC, are perused and summoning of the husband on the basis of an order which could not stand the test of law is itself illegal. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the Husband are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023

According to the facts of this case, the wife filed a complaint at the police station under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against her Husband and In-laws.

Later, the case was registered against the husband and In-laws, and a summoning order dated 30.08.2022 was passed by the Magistrate, Azamgarh, and the entire proceedings of the case are pending in the court of the Magistrate, Azamgarh.

Upon this, the present application has been filed by the Husband under Section 482 of CrPC to quash the proceedings and the summoning order dated 30.08.2022 against him.

_________________________________________________

Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- Kerala High Court - General and Non-Specific Allegations against the Sister-in-law, Proceedings Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

____________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband submitted that the order impugned in the present application is arbitrary, and the Magistrate has simply recorded a conclusion on the basis of the complaint, the statement of the wife, and her witnesses that a prima facie offense under Sections 504, 506, and 406 of IPC have been committed by the husband and In-laws.

It is also submitted that the conclusion recorded by the Magistrate is not preceded by a discussion of the allegations made in the complaint by the wife or the statements of the wife and her witnesses as recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC.

It is further submitted that in the absence of any finding recorded by the Magistrate, on the basis of allegations made in the complaint, the statement of the wife, and the statements of her witnesses, no prima facie satisfaction was recorded by the Magistrate for summoning the husband under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Arguments- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023

It is also submitted that the husband has been summoned by the Magistrate without holding any inquiry, and no finding has been recorded by the Magistrate in the present case.

Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of proceedings and summoning order dated 30.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate against the Husband.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgment 14.09.2022- Bombay High Court-No specific allegations against parents-in law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 27.09.2022- Madras High Court-No Prima Facie material available against Parents-in-law and Sister-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

____________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023

Priyanka Srivastava and another Vs. State of U.P. and another

Mahboob and Others Vs. State of U.P. and another

Smt. Shiv Kumar and Others Vs. State of U.P. and another

Hariram Verma and Others Vs. State of U.P. and another

M/s. Pepsi Food Ltd. & Another Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate & Others

S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Neeta Bhalla

Anita Malhotra Vs. Apparel Export Promotion Council

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023

It is stated by the court that in the present case, the Magistrate has not conducted any inquiry to satisfy himself that the allegations made by the wife in the complaint constitute an offense and there is nothing on record to show that the Magistrate has applied his mind to arrive at a prima facie conclusion, and such order cannot be accepted as a proper legal judicial order passed after following the procedure of the law.

It is also stated by the court that the summoning of the husband to appear in the criminal court is a serious matter which affects his dignity, self-respect, and his image in society, and the process of the criminal court should not be made a weapon of harassment.

The court further stated that the Magistrate has passed a cryptic order simply by saying that the statement of the wife as well as the statement of her witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC are perused and summoning the husband on the basis of an order which could not stand the test of law is itself illegal.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023

The court also referred to one of the above-mentioned cases in which it has been held that the Magistrate is required to at least mention in the summoning order about the prima facie satisfaction for summoning the accused person, and the order passed by the Magistrate must reflect that the Magistrate has exercised his jurisdiction in accordance with the law, and he has satisfied himself about the prima facie allegation made in the complaint.

It has also been held that the Magistrate shall note in the impugned order the contents of the complaint and the pieces of evidence under sections 200 and 202 of CrPC and there shall be a discussion of evidence available in the case, and it should be considered as to what overt act has been allegedly committed by the accused person.

At the stage of summoning an accused, the Magistrate is not required to examine meticulously or to evaluate the evidence, and the Magistrate is not required to record the detailed reason for passing a summoning order, and the only thing expected by the Magistrate is a brief order which indicates the application of mind.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023

It is also stated by the court that it is a settled principle of law that while summoning an accused person, the court shall see the prima facie evidence, and the inquiry under sections 200 and 202 of CrPC is limited only to know the truth of the allegations made in the complaint and to check whether, on the material placed by the person who filed the complaint, a prima facie case has been made out for summoning the accused person or not.

Furthermore, the court stated that the passing of summoning order for summoning any accused person is a very important matter which initiates a criminal proceeding against the accused, and such orders shall not be passed without applying judicial mind.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that it is clear that the impugned summoning order passed by the Magistrate is cryptic, it does not stand the test laid down by the court, and the summoning order passed by the Magistrate is liable to be quashed, and the Magistrate shall pass a fresh order in the light of the observations made in this case

Therefore, the present application filed by the husband is allowed, and the summoning order dated 30.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate, Azamgarh, and the proceedings against the husband is hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023- Gujarat High Court- Non-Specific Allegations against the Parents-in-law, Sister-in-law, and Aunt of wife, FIR Quashed.

498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023- General and Non-specific Allegations against the Husband, Mother-in-law, and Sisters-in-law, FIR Quashed.

_____________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Summons Quash Judgement 31.01.2023

In this article, the Allahabad High Court held that the Magistrate has not conducted any inquiry to satisfy himself that the allegations made by the wife in the complaint constitute an offense and there is nothing on record to show that the Magistrate has applied his mind to arrive at a prima facie conclusion.

It is also held that the Magistrate has passed a cryptic order simply by saying that the statement of the wife as well as the statement of her witnesses recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC are perused and summoning the husband on the basis of an order which could not stand the test of law is itself illegal.

Therefore, the summoning order dated 30.08.2022 passed by the Magistrate, Azamgarh, and the proceedings against the husband are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023- Gujarat High Court - False Allegations against the Husband and Six In-laws, FIR Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 04 Feb 2023 09:14:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023- Gujarat High Court – False Allegations against the Husband and Six In-laws, FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023- In this article, the Gujarat High Court held that the FIR filed by the wife does not show any physical harassment or mental abuse of the wife or any dowry demand made by the husband and six In-laws. The FIR filed by the wife appears to be a pressure on the husband and In-laws, and the wife has not sustained any injury involving any mental depravity, therefore the continuance of the proceedings against the husband and In-laws would lead to the wastage of judicial time. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the husband and six In-laws are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

__________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

According to the facts of this case, after the marriage between the wife and the husband, the wife disclosed the fact to the husband that she never wanted to reside with the husband and his family.

It is stated that the wife left her husband and In-laws and requested the husband to release her from the marriage, and on 15.04.2019 the wife sent a written letter to the husband in which she stated that the marriage was against her wish, and even after the marriage, the wife had no interest to carry the matrimonial relationship, and she wanted to settle with some other person.

The wife also stated that she has on her own will release herself from the marriage, and the wife also admitted to having received Rs 4500 as Mehar amount on the date of marriage, and the husband has also given consent to the wife’s request by way of the communication dated 03.06.2019.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

It is also stated that the wife filed a complaint at the police station against the husband and In-laws, and later in presence of the representatives of the community and other family members of the husband, a settlement was drawn and the parents-in-law and other In-laws settled the matter with the wife, and also permitted the wife to stay in her matrimonial house.

Later, the wife lodged an FIR at the police station, district Sabarkantha, for the offenses punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506(2), and 114 of IPC against the husband, parents-in-law, and four other In-laws.

_________________________________________________

Read Latest Article- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 27.09.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court-No Specific Allegation made against Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023- Gujarat High Court – No Commission of Offense disclosed against the Mother-in-law, FIR Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

_________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband and six In-laws submitted that the wife never resided with the husband even at the time of lodging the complaint, and after the settlement, and the husband never resided with the wife even when all other family members of the husband accepted the wife and allowed her to stay in her matrimonial house.

It is also submitted that the husband did not have cordial relations with his parents and left the parental home, and even though the wife was given shelter by the parents-in-law, then also the wife without any reason and rhyme has filed the FIR against the husband and In-laws alleging of dowry demand.

It is further submitted that if the wife has any issue, she could have brought it to the notice of the representatives of the community members who have earlier settled the dispute between the wife, the husband, and the In-laws, and without any cause and giving any detail, the FIR has been filed by the wife alleging that the parents-in-law were physically harassing her, and used to abuse her, stating that she did not bring any jewelry from her parents, and removed her from her matrimonial home.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

It is also submitted that the FIR is false, it is a pressure tactic, and appears to be the misuse of the provision of the law, done by the wife.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing and setting aside the FIR, and the Proceedings against the husband, and six In-laws.

On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife submitted that there is a consistent view of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the present court that in such matters, the husband shall be prosecuted.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

The Public prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State submitted that any FIR should be quashed in accordance with the guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the parameters laid down therein.

Therefore, it is prayed that the petition filed by the husband and six In-laws shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quashing after Divorce 29.09.2022- Calcutta High Court- False Allegations found against the Husband. F.I.R Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 04.01.2023- Jharkhand High Court – The Parents-in-law, and Brother-in-law are discharged from the case, Impugned order quashed.
______________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.

G.V. Rao Vs. L.H.V. Prasad

State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

It is stated by the court that the FIR filed by the wife suggests that only on the settlement before the representatives of the community and the family members of the husband, the wife was permitted to stay in her matrimonial house, and the husband was not residing with the wife.

It is also stated by the court that the allegations made by the wife regarding dowry demand appear to be gotten up, since the communication dated 15.04.2019 between the wife and the husband does not suggest any dowry articles, rather the wife has admitted about the Mehar amount which she has received in cash, and the husband has also replied to the letter sent by the wife, and accepted to release the wife from the marriage.

It is further stated by the court that when the parents-in-law and other In-laws gathered for the settlement, the husband was not present there, and further a public notice was given by the father-in-law on 17.07.2019 informing that the husband is not under their obedience, and he was disowned from the family.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

It is also stated by the court that in the present case, the FIR filed by the wife appears to be a pressure on the In-laws where the parents-in-law had helped the wife settle the issue and given her shelter.

The communication between the wife and the husband suggests that there are internal disputes between both of them, where the wife had no desire to continue her matrimonial life with the husband, and the husband had accepted her request of ending the marriage, on the other hand, the husband did not have cordial relations with his parents.

Furthermore, the court stated that the detail of any dowry demand or any physical harassment is not reflected in the FIR, and if any injury sustained by the wife does not involve any mental depravity, nor it amounts to a heinous crime, then the continuance of the proceedings would lead to the wastage of court’s time as there would remain no possibility of any conviction of the accused.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

The court also stated that it is a fit case where the court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC for securing the ends of the justice.

In view of the above, discussion, the court held that after taking all the facts and circumstances of the case into consideration, the petition filed by the husband and six In-laws is allowed, and the FIR and the proceedings against the husband and six In-laws are hereby quashed and set aside.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023- Gujarat High Court- Non-Specific Allegations against the Parents-in-law, Sister-in-law, and Aunt of wife, FIR Quashed.

498a quash judgement 29.06.2021- Case against Parents-in-law and married sister-in-law do not attract 490A on non specific allegations. FIR quashed.

_________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 30.01.2023

In this article, the Gujarat High Court held that the husband was not residing with the wife, the FIR filed by the wife appears to be a pressure on the husband and In-laws, and it does not show any physical harassment or mental abuse of the wife or any dowry demand made by the husband and six In-laws.

It is also held that the wife has not sustained any injury involving any mental depravity, and the continuance of the proceedings against the husband and In-laws would lead to the wastage of the court’s time, as there would remain no possibility of any conviction.

Therefore, the FIR and the proceedings against the husband and six In-laws are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023- Gujarat High Court - No Commission of Offense disclosed against the Mother-in-law, FIR Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 02 Feb 2023 11:29:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023- Gujarat High Court – No Commission of Offense disclosed against the Mother-in-law, FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023- In this article, the Gujarat High Court held that the FIR filed by the wife does not disclose any specific allegation or any commission of an offense against the Mother-in-law. The FIR filed by the wife fails to make out a prima facie case against the mother-in-law regarding the harassment of the wife for domestic work and making the demand of dowry. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the Mother-in-law are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023

According to the facts mentioned in the complaint filed by the wife, after the marriage between the wife and the husband, the wife started living with her husband separately from her mother-in-law, and sister-in-law and the husband of the wife is an advocate.

It is stated that whenever the wife used to come to visit her parental home, she was harassed by the mother-in-law, and sister-in-law and they used to instigate the husband to ask the wife for one-fourth share from the wife’s father's property and bring that as a dowry, and the mother-in-law along with sister-in-law used to harass the wife for domestic work.

It is also stated that five months prior to the filing of the complaint by the wife, the husband, and sister-in-law removed the wife from her matrimonial house by asking the wife to bring one-fourth share from her father’s house and the wife has alleged that she had given Rs. Seventy Thousand to the husband, and Rs. Thirty Thousand to her father-in-law, and in spite of that the husband, mother-in-law, and sister-in-law were demanding more dowry from her.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023

It is further stated that one day the parents-in-law and the husband came to the parental house of the wife, abused her, quarreled with her, and threatened the wife to not return to her matrimonial home without taking one-fourth share of her father’s property.

Upon this, on the very same day, the wife filed a complaint at the police station, and an FIR was registered for the offenses punishable under Sections 498A and 114 of IPC as well as Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the Mother-in-law.

The Mother-in-law has filed an application under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing the FIR, and to terminate all subsequent proceedings in connection with the FIR against her.

_________________________________________________

Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – General Allegations against the Husband and Parents-in-law, Chargesheet Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023- Jharkhand High Court – No Offense made out against the Six In-laws, FIR Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

___________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the Mother-in-law submitted that the facts of this case reflect that the matrimonial life of the wife is of more than 12 years, and the allegations made by the wife that she was harassed for domestic work are false as no such specific allegations are found in the FIR suggesting any details of harassment which could fall under the definition of cruelty as defined under section 498A of IPC.

It is also submitted that the fact of asking the wife for her share from her parental house does not constitute an offense, and cannot be considered an act of cruelty, and asking for the share in the property of the father of the wife does not fall as unlawful demand as the law provides for the share of the daughters also in the ancestral properties.

It is further submitted that the wife has not specified in what form she was harassed by the mother-in-law for the share in the property of her father, and how the mother-in-law would have influenced the wife for meeting such demand.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023

It is also submitted that the allegations of harassment made by the wife against the mother-in-law do not create any proximate link of accusing cruelty for the demands of dowry, and the offense also does not fall within the statutory limit of drawing the inference of any cruelty, as the matrimonial life of the wife is of more than 12 years.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the FIR, and to terminate all subsequent proceedings in connection with the FIR against the mother-in-law.

On the other hand, the Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the state submitted that the present case is of dowry demand, and it should be viewed very seriously, and the court shall not exercise discretion against the mother-in-law.

Therefore, it is prayed that the application filed by the mother-in-law shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- No Offense made out against the Father-in-law, Cousin Brother-in-law, Elder Brother-in-law & his Wife, FIR Quashed.
_____________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023

Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. and Anr.

G.V. Rao Vs. L.H.V. Prasad

State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023

It is stated by the court that in one of the above-mentioned cases, the Hon’ble Supreme court has held that if the FIR does not disclose any specific allegation against the accused person in the matter arising out of a matrimonial dispute, then it would be a clear abuse of legal and judicial process to send the accused person to undergo the trail.

The Courts are expected to exercise a cautious approach in matters of quashing, especially in matrimonial disputes cases, and should check whether the FIR discloses the commission of an offense by the relatives of the main accused person or the FIR prima facie discloses an over-implicating case by involving the entire family members of the accused person at the instance of the person who filed the complaint and is out to settle the scores arising out of small domestic bickering while settling down in the new matrimonial surrounding.

It has also been held that it is the legal duty of the High Court to examine whether there is any prima facie material against the accused persons so that the accused persons can be directed to undergo the trial.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023

Furthermore, It has also been held that it is left to the High Courts to consider and decide whether the case is a fit case to send the accused person for trial when the FIR failed to make out a prima facie case against the accused persons regarding the allegation of inflicting physical and mental torture to the person who filed the complaint by demanding dowry from the said person.

It is a well-settled principle of law that if the FIR does not disclose the commission of an offense, then the court would be justified in quashing the proceedings to prevent the abuse of the process of the law.

It is also stated by the court that in another one of the above-mentioned cases, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the High Court should quash the complaints arising out of the matrimonial disputes in which all the family members are roped into the matrimonial litigation.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023

It has also been held that when the little matrimonial disputes erupt into serious proportions resulting in the commissions of serious and heinous crimes in which the elder members of the family are also roped in, it results in the people involved in the case who could have counseled and could have brought rapprochement are rendered helpless as they are arrayed as an accused in a criminal case.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that in view of the reasons given, observations made, and taking the facts and circumstances into consideration in the present case, the impugned FIR and the subsequent proceedings against the mother-in-law are required to be quashed and set aside.

Therefore, the FIR, and all subsequent proceedings in connection with the FIR against the mother-in-law, are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash after Chargesheet 22.09.2022- Chhattisgarh High Court- Vague allegations against Mother-in-law, Sister and Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash Judgment 14.09.2022- Bombay High Court-No specific allegations against parents-in law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR quashed.

___________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 25.01.2023

In this article, the Gujarat High Court held that the FIR does not disclose any specific allegation against the mother-in-law in the matter arising out of a matrimonial dispute, and it would be a clear abuse of legal and judicial process to send the mother-in-law to undergo the trail.

It is also held that the FIR filed by the wife does not disclose the commission of an offense, and the court is justified in quashing the proceedings against the mother-in-law to prevent the abuse of the process of the law.

Therefore, the FIR, and all subsequent proceedings in connection with the FIR against the mother-in-law, are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023- Calcutta High Court - General Allegations against the Husband and Parents-in-law, Chargesheet Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 01 Feb 2023 09:21:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – General Allegations against the Husband and Parents-in-law, Chargesheet Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023- In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that there are no materials available in the case against the husband and parents-in-law for the alleged offense, and the allegations made by the wife are general in nature. The facts and circumstances mentioned in the case diary and chargesheet do not make out a prima facie case of any cognizable offense against the husband and parents-in-law, and the present case has been filed only with the intention to harass the husband and parents-in-law. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the husband and parents-in-law are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

_________________________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

According to the facts of this case, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 02.07.2006, and after the marriage, the wife started to reside in her matrimonial home with her husband and parents-in-law.

It is stated that from the very first day after the marriage, the wife used to keep all the gifts received by the husband and parents-in-law, and other ornaments & articles of value belonging to the husband and parents-in-law in an almirah under the lock and key, and the keys were always in the wife possession.

It is also stated that the husband and parents-in-law allowed the wife to have unrestricted access to all the documents of bank accounts, atm cards with security pins, deeds of the house, and all the ornaments kept in the almirah.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

It is further stated that the wife continually since her marriage treated the husband and parents-in-law with the utmost cruelty, and later the wife and her husband were blessed with two children, one son, and one daughter, and the wife continued her misbehavior with the husband and parents-in-law.

It is also stated that the wife raised petty issues on a daily basis which caused mental strain and unrest within the family, however for the sake of the husband, the parents-in-law overlooked such acts and conduct and treated the wife as their own daughter with care and affection, hoping that the wife will understand their love and trust for her, and she will start respecting them.

Furthermore, it is stated that in the year 2016, the wife expressed her desire to open a school for small children with the intention to achieve a successful professional carrier, and the husband and parents-in-law willingly encouraged the wife and supported her mentally and financially and invested a substantial sum of money in opening of the school, and also purchased a property in Kolkata.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

It is also stated that the husband and parents-in-law also took financial assistance from the bank and the wife was inducted as one of the co-owner of that property, and the husband and parents-in-law always stood by the wife to support her zeal of opening the school.

It is further stated that due to the neglectful behavior of the wife, the husband and parents-in-law used to take care of the children for their daily requirements and fulfilled all the requirements which children generally depend upon their mother.

It is also stated that the husband and parents-in-law tried really hard to reconcile differences and to make the wife understand, but all the efforts went in vain when the wife left her matrimonial home along with the children without intimating the husband and parents-in-law and went to her paternal house on 29.09.2018.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

Later on 01.10.2018 the wife with her elder brother came to her matrimonial home and started shouting at top of her voice, threatening the husband and parents-in-law that she has several connections with some influential people and if the husband and parents-in-law will not transfer all the properties in her name, then they will have to face severe consequences.

Upon this, the husband and parents-in-law went to the police station and filed a complaint on 13.10.2018 against the wife, and came to learn the fact that the wife already had filed an FIR dated 11.10.2018 against the husband and parents-in-law and a case was registered under the Section 498A of IPC against the husband and parents-in-law, and the case is pending before the Magistrate.

The husband and parents-in-law submitted that the entire alleged incident is false and frivolous, and the case is registered to put them under duress, and on 28.10.2018, the wife requested the investigation agency not to proceed with the case by sending a letter as the wife wanted to settle the dispute.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

When the investigation was completed, the police on the basis of the complaint filed by the wife and the two statements recorded on 11.10.2018, submitted a chargesheet dated 15.01.2019 under Section 498A of IPC against the husband and parents-in-law.

Upon this, the husband and parents-in-law have filed a revisional application for quashing the proceedings and the chargesheet dated 15.01.2019 against them.

_________________________________________________

Read Article- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- No Offense made out against the Father-in-law, Cousin Brother-in-law, Elder Brother-in-law & his Wife, FIR Quashed.
498A Quash after Chargesheet 10.11.2022- Bombay High Court - No Specific and Precise allegations against the two In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

__________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband and parents-in-law submitted that the FIR filed by the wife read with the statements of the witnesses in comparison with the law backdrop, the instant proceedings are not maintainable either in facts or in law as no prima facie case has been made out against the husband and parents-in-law.

It is also submitted that the written complaint subsequently treated as FIR filed by the wife does not cast any specific act of cruelty as defined by section 498A of IPC in any manner, and thus the cognizance taken by the Magistrate is not of any merit and substance.

It is further submitted that the chargesheet dated 15.01.2019 contains the statement of the brother of the wife and the statement of the father of the wife along with the statements of the wife, and these all statements altogether do not attribute to any of the ingredients of section 498A of IPC in any manner.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

It is also submitted that the blatant allegations spelled out by the wife along with the two bald statements of her brother and father recorded under Section 161 of CrPC lack specific complaint of any cognizable offense, and the impugned proceeding is utterly bad in law, and the same is liable to be quashed.

Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of the proceedings and the chargesheet against the husband and parents-in-law.

On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the state submitted the case diary before the court, which contains only two statements under section 161 of CrPC other than the statements of the wife, which are of her brother and her father.

Therefore, it is prayed that the revisional application filed by the husband and parents-in-law shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quashing after Divorce 29.09.2022- Calcutta High Court- False Allegations found against the Husband. F.I.R Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 04.01.2023- Jharkhand High Court – The Parents-in-law, and Brother-in-law are discharged from the case, Impugned order quashed.
______________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.

Rajesh Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.

Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr.

Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr

Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of UP & Anr.

G.V. Rao Vs. L.H.V. Prasad & Ors.

K. Subha Rao Vs. The State of Telangana

Ramesh Chandra Gupta Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.

Vineet Kumar and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another

State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy

State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal

Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and others

State of Maharashtra Vs. Salman Salim Khan

Prakash Singh Badal Vs. State of Punjab

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

It is stated by the court that in the present case, the court perused the materials on record, including the case diary which contains only two statements under Section 161 of CrPC other than the statement of the wife, and those statements are of the brother and father of the wife.

It is also stated that the wife changed her mind and thought of resolving the dispute within 17 days of the filing of the complaint, which gives the impression that the wife had filed the complaint in the heat of the moment, and the first complaint filed by the wife against her husband and parents-in-law is after 16 years of the marriage.

It is further stated that the wife stated in her letter that the police should stop the investigation for some time and the wife will update the police as to how the matter will proceed, and no further update was given by the wife to the police regarding any further development or settlement.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

The court also stated that the complaint was filed on 11.10.2018 and the chargesheet was submitted on 15.01.2019, and there was absolutely no development in the investigation between the said dates.

The court further stated that there is absolutely no other material in the case diary against the husband and parents-in-law for the alleged offense, and the allegations made by the wife are general in nature.

Furthermore, the court stated that there are no allegations under Section 406 of IPC, and it supports the case of the husband and parents-in-law that the wife and her brother have taken away all the wife’s articles from her matrimonial house.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

The court also stated that the allegations in the written complaint are general in nature, and all the allegations seem without any basis, and it seems that the present case has been filed only with the intention to harass the husband and parents-in-law.

It is further stated by the court that the facts and circumstances mentioned in the case diary and chargesheet do not make out a prima facie case of any cognizable offense against the husband and parents-in-law, and there are no materials available for the proceeding against the husband and parents-in-law towards the trial, and the present case is fit for exercising the inherent powers of the court.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that there is no substance in the allegations made by the wife, and no material exists to make out a prima facie complicity of the husband and parents-in-law in a cognizable offense.

Therefore, a revision application is allowed, and the proceedings and the chargesheet dated 15.01.2019 against the husband and parents-in-law are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 01.11.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court - General and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A quash after chargesheet 14.06.2021 - In-Laws living separately from the Couple and no specific role in the incident. FIR Quashed.

___________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that there are no materials against the husband and parents-in-law, and the present case has been filed only with the intention to harass the husband and parents-in-law.

It is also held that the allegations in the written complaint are general in nature, all the allegations seem without any basis, there is no substance in the allegations made by the wife, and no material exists to make out a prima facie complicity of the husband and parents-in-law in a cognizable offense.

Therefore, the proceedings and the chargesheet dated 15.01.2019 against the husband and parents-in-law are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023- Jharkhand High Court - No Offense made out against the Six In-laws, FIR Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 30 Jan 2023 12:27:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023- Jharkhand High Court – No Offense made out against the Six In-laws, FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023- In this article, the Jharkhand High Court held that the offense alleged against the six In-laws is not made out, and the allegations made by the wife of assault and dowry demands are all directed against the husband. The only allegation on the In-laws is that on one occasion they taunted the wife on the topic of dowry, but the object of the said taunt is not stated, and it will be an abuse of the process of the court and law to permit the proceedings against the six In-laws simply because they are relatives of the husband. Therefore, the criminal Proceedings against the Six In-laws are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

_______________________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

According to the facts mentioned in the FIR filed by the wife, at the time of marriage between the wife and her husband, the husband demanded payment of dowry from the wife, and after the marriage, on 08.12.2019 the wife and the husband started to live in Pune where the husband was working.

It is stated that in Pune, on 16.12.2019 the wife started to stay in the house of an In-law with her husband, and the moment the wife of the In-law came, there was a violent altercation between the husband, the In-law, and his wife.

It is also stated that the husband started assaulting the wife, and thereafter on 17.12.2019 the husband and the wife shifted to another flat in the same apartment. There were no household articles in the new flat, and whenever the wife asked for anything, she was assaulted by the husband.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

It is further stated that after the lockdown during the Covid Pandemic, the husband used to work in the house of the In-law till late at night, and also started talking with the wife, but on 15.07.2020, the husband attempted to choke the wife to death by a pillow.

It is also stated that after the said incident, the wife's mother came there and pleaded with the husband to treat the wife nicely, and on this, the husband demanded Rs Fifty lakhs for purchasing a new flat.

Furthermore, it is stated that on 04.01.2020 the husband shifted with his girlfriend, and the wife along with her mother returned to their native home.

Upon this, the wife filed an FIR at the Police Station for the offense under Sections 341, 323, 498A, 504, 506 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against her husband and six In-laws, and the case were registered against the husband and six In-laws.

_________________________________________________

Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023- In Complaint Case – The summoning orders shall not be passed without applying the Judicial Mind.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

________________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband and In-laws submitted that there is no material available to disclose the offense as alleged against the six In-laws, and all the allegations are directed against the husband.

It is also submitted that all six In-laws never even shared the domestic household of the wife, and they have been falsely implicated in the present case on general allegations

It is further submitted that even if it is assumed that the entire FIR is true, the offense will also be made out only against the husband, and not against the In-laws.

Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of the entire criminal proceedings against the husband and the In-laws.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

On the other hand, the Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the wife submitted that immediately after the marriage, the In-laws started taunting the wife for bringing less dowry, and there has been a bank transaction by which the amount was transferred to the account of the husband.

It is also submitted that the investigation of the present case is still pending, and the FIR cannot be considered to be an encyclopedia that contains all the information.

Therefore, it is prayed that the FIR should not be quashed, and the petition filed by the husband and the In-laws shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023- General and Non-specific Allegations against the Husband, Mother-in-law, and Sisters-in-law, FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- Kerala High Court - General and Non-Specific Allegations against the Sister-in-law, Proceedings Quashed.

____________________________________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

Kahkashan Kausar Vs. State of Bihar

K. Subha Rao Vs. State of Telangana

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

It is stated by the court that in the above-mentioned cases, the Hon’ble Supreme court has held that the courts should be careful during the proceedings against the distant relatives of the husband in the crimes pertaining to dowry deaths and matrimonial disputes.

It has also been held that the relatives and family members of the husband should not be roped in the case on the basis of the omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the relatives and family members are made out in the case.

The Supreme Court also held that in numerous instances the court has expressed concern over the misuse of the provision of Section 498A of IPC, as there has been increasing in the tendency of implicating the relatives of the husband in such matrimonial disputes without analyzing the long term outcome of a trial on the person who filed the complaint as well as on the accused persons.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

It is also stated by the court that in the present case, on the plain reading of the FIR, the court is of the view that the offense alleged against the six In-laws is not made out, and the only allegation on the In-laws is that on one occasion they taunted the wife on the dowry, but it is not stated anywhere that what was the object of the said taunt made by the In-laws.

The court further stated that the entire incident took place after the husband and the wife shifted to Pune, and the allegations made by the wife of assault and dowry demands are all directed against the husband.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that it will be an abuse of the process of the court and law to permit the proceedings against the six In-laws simply because they are relatives of the husband.

Therefore, FIR and the entire criminal proceedings against the six In-laws are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 15.09.2022- Telangana High Court - Vague allegations against Parent-in-law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 10.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - Vague Allegations against the Sister-in-law and Another In-law. F.I.R Quashed.

________________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 24.01.2023

In this article, Jharkhand High Court held that the entire incident took place after the husband and the wife shifted to Pune, and the allegations made by the wife of assault and dowry demands are all directed against the husband.

It is also held that on the basis of the allegations made by the wife, the offense alleged against the six In-laws is not made out, and it will be an abuse of the process of the court and law to permit the proceedings against the six In-laws simply because they are relatives of the husband.

Therefore, FIR and the entire criminal proceedings against the six In-laws are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023- General and Non-specific Allegations against the Husband, Mother-in-law, and Sisters-in-law, FIR Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 27 Jan 2023 11:38:00 +0000

498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023- General and Non-specific Allegations against the Husband, Mother-in-law, and Sisters-in-law, FIR Quashed.

498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023- In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that the allegations made by the wife are not prima facie correct and there are general and non-specific allegations regarding the commission of any cognizable offenses against the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law. There is no evidence to show that the wife was subjected to cruelty, and the allegations made by the wife have been proven to be false, as the documents provided by the husband prove that he was not present at the alleged place of occurrence of the said offense. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

_________________________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023

According to the facts of this case, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 24.01.2018 according to Hindu rites, customs, and traditions.

It is stated that on 09.12.2018 the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law went to the house of the wife and threatened her with dire consequences, and the husband and In-laws also used filthy language with the wife.

Upon this, the wife lodged an FIR at the Police Station, Jangipara for the offense punishable under Section 498A/ 406/ 504/ 506/ 34 of IPC against the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law, and on 18.12.2018 the case was registered against the husband and In-laws.

The husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law have filed a revision petition for quashing the proceedings against them pending before the Magistrate Court, Hooghly.

_________________________________________________

Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – General Allegations against the Husband and In-laws, Chargesheet Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – General Allegations against the Husband and In-laws, Chargesheet Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

____________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law submitted that the prima facie documents and pieces of evidence are in favor of the husband and In-laws, and as such the entire proceeding against them is liable to be set aside.

It is also submitted that the entire story of the wife is baseless, false and the FIR has been registered by the wife only to humiliate and hamper the social life of the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law, and if the proceedings are not quashed, then the husband and In-laws shall suffer irreparable loss & injury, and it will be a miscarriage of justice.

A copy of the order dated 09.05.2022 of the family court, Nagpur, was also submitted in which a decree of divorce was granted to the husband and the wife.

Arguments- 498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023

It is further submitted that on 09.12.2018 the husband was employed with the Railway at Nagpur Division, and was present on the duty in Nagpur, and it is not possible for the husband to come on the same day from Nagpur to Jangipara, Hooghly to threaten the wife.

Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of proceedings against the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law.

On the other hand, the Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the state produced the case diary and submitted that there are statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 of CrPC which support the case of the wife.

Therefore, it is prayed that the revision partition filed by the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- Kerala High Court - General and Non-Specific Allegations against the Sister-in-law, Proceedings Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023- Gujarat High Court- Non-Specific Allegations against the Parents-in-law, Sister-in-law, and Aunt of wife, FIR Quashed.
______________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023

Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.

Rajesh Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.

Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr.

Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr.

Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.

G.V. Rao Vs. L.H.V. Prasad & Ors.

K. Subha Rao Vs. The State of Telangana

Ramesh Chandra Gupta Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.

Vineet Kumar and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another

State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy

State of Haryana and Others Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others

Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023

It is stated by the court that the court agrees with the advocate appearing on behalf of the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law that it is not prima facie believable that just to threaten the wife, the husband would come to Jangipara, Hooghly on the same day when he attended his office at Nagpur, and as such it appears that the allegations against the husband and In-laws are not correct.

The court also stated that despite being allegedly threatened on 09.12.2018 by the husband and In-laws, the wife filed a case after a delay of almost 10 days on 18.12.2018.

It is further stated by the court that from the materials on record and in the case diary, it is apparent that there is no evidence to show that the wife was subjected to, cruelty of such a nature as defined under Section 498A of IPC.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023

It is also stated by the court that the only allegation against the husband and In-laws is of threatening the wife, allegedly on 09.12.2018, and the absence of the husband has been proved by the documents and there is no material or evidence to show that there was any misappropriation and entrustment as required under Section 406 of IPC.

Furthermore, it is stated by the court that the allegations made by the wife have been proved to be prima facie false as the documents provided by the husband prove his presence at Nagpur, and not at the alleged place of occurrence at Jangipara, Hooghly.

It is also stated by the court that the wife has misused the provisions of law which were enacted to help the distressed wives, and the wife has clearly abused the process of law and court, and in the present case, interference is required by the court for the ends of justice.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023

In view of the above discussion, the court held that the allegations made by the wife in the present case are not prima facie correct and there are general allegations against the husband and In-laws, and non-specific allegations regarding the commission of any cognizable offenses have been made against the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law.

Therefore, the FIR and the proceedings against the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash after charge sheet 19.09.2022- Bombay High Court-Omnibus and general allegations against Sister-in-law. FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 04.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - No Specific Allegations against Three In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

____________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quashing After Divorce 19.01.2023

In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that there is no evidence to show that the wife was subjected to the cruelty, and the allegations made by the wife have been proved to be prima facie false as the documents provided by the husband proves that he was not present at the alleged place of occurrence of the said offense.

It was also held that the allegations made by the wife are not prima facie correct and there are general and non-specific allegations against the husband and In-laws.

Therefore, the FIR and the Proceedings against the husband, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- No Offense made out against the Father-in-law, Cousin Brother-in-law, Elder Brother-in-law & his Wife, FIR Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 24 Jan 2023 12:45:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- No Offense made out against the Father-in-law, Cousin Brother-in-law, Elder Brother-in-law & his Wife, FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- In this article, the Jharkhand High Court held that on the basis of the allegations made by the wife, no offense is made out against the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife. The grievance of the wife is with respect to the partnership business of the gas agency, and the entire story of the prosecution revolves around the financial dispute over a partnership business which has been given a color of section 498A of IPC. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

According to the facts mentioned in the FIR filed by the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized in the year 2008, and the husband of the wife died on 27.01.2021, and the wife is living with her father-in-law.

It is stated that the father-in-law started a partnership business of Gas Agency, and after the demise of the husband, the father-in-law introduced the wife as Fifty Percent Partner in his partnership business of Gas Agency, and the partnership was executed on 24.03.2021, and it was submitted in the office of an Oil Corporation.

It is also stated that under the instigation of the brother-in-law and his wife, the father-in-law threatened the wife that he will not include the wife’s name in the Gas Agency business.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

It is further stated that the father-in-law had taken several hefty loans, and for the repayment of those loans he fraudulently borrowed money from the wife, and the wife was forced to issue cheques for the repayment of the loan amount, and the wife was also forced to execute a resolution deed against the notarized partnership deed dated 24.03.2021.

It is also stated that on 15.06.2021 when the wife was suffering from corona, the father-in-law entered the wife’s room and yelled at her while rummaging for documents that were related to partnership business, and he also committed criminal mischief by damaging the bed and other articles in the wife’s room.

Upon this, the wife filed an FIR in the police station under Sections 498A, 379, 120B, 34 of IPC against the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife, and on 30.10.2021 the case was registered and is pending before the court of Magistrate, Bokaro.

_________________________________________________

Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – General Allegations against the Husband and In-laws, Chargesheet Quashed.
498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023- In Complaint Case – The summoning orders shall not be passed without applying the Judicial Mind.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

______________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife submitted that the husband of the wife is not alive and the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized 13 years ago, and the present case is filed by the wife against the In-laws only for the purpose of settling property dispute with them.

It is also submitted that the allegations made by the wife in the FIR do not disclose an offense under Section 498A or any other offense, and it was the wife who was continuously harassing the father-in-law, and the father-in-law was forced to take legal recourse against the harassment.

It is further submitted that the present case has been instituted in retaliation to the case filed by the father-in-law under Section 5 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 against the wife.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

It is also submitted that the husband of the wife during his lifetime had taken a huge loan by using the cheques of the father-in-law as collateral at a high rate of interest, and there were other property disputes for which the present case has been filed by the wife to coerce the In-laws to a settlement as per the choice of the wife.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the entire case proceedings against the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife.

On the other hand, the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the state and the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife submitted that a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the wife in the present case, and no interference in the impugned order is required at this stage of the case.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

It is also submitted that a prima facie case has been made out against the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife.

Therefore, it is prayed that the instant petition filed by the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quashing after Divorce 27.09.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court-Omnibus allegations against Sister and Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quashing after Divorce 29.09.2022- Calcutta High Court- False Allegations found against the Husband. F.I.R Quashed.

_________________________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

Preeti Gupta & Another Vs. State of Jharkhand & Another

State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal

Divisional Forest Officer & Another Vs. G.V. Sudhakar Rao & Others

Kahkashan Kausar Vs. State of Bihar

K. Subha Rao Vs. State of Telangana

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

It is stated by the court that from a plain reading of the FIR in the present case, it is clear from the tone and tenor that the grievance of the wife is with respect to the partnership business of the gas agency, and the entire story of the prosecution revolves around the financial dispute over a partnership business which has been given a color of section 498A of IPC.

It is also stated by the court that the object of enacting section 498A of IPC was to protect a woman from being subjected to cruelty by the family members and relatives of the husband, particularly in cases relating to unlawful demands.

It is further stated by the court that it is surprising that the elder brother-in-law and his wife who are living in Australia, and not even sharing the same domestic household as that of the wife have been roped into the case on account of some mobile calls made by them to the father-in-law.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

It is also stated by the court that the cousin brother-in-law is also a distant relative, and cannot be said to be living with the wife, and the present case has been filed against the old father-in-law by the wife to take shelter for protection under Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that on the basis of the allegations made by the wife, no offense is made out against the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife, and it will be a misuse of the process of the court to permit this criminal prosecution to proceed further.

Therefore, the FIR and the entire criminal proceedings against the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife arising out of the case which is pending in the court of Magistrate, Bokaro is hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 10.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - Vague Allegations against the Sister-in-law and Another In-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 15.09.2022- Telangana High Court - Vague allegations against Parent-in-law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

________________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

In this article, the Jharkhand High Court held that the grievance of the wife is with respect to the partnership business of the gas agency, and the entire story of the prosecution revolves around the financial dispute over a partnership business.

It is also held that the present case has been filed against the old father-in-law by the wife to take shelter for protection under the Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, and on the basis of the allegations made by the wife, no offense is made out against the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife.

Therefore, the FIR and the entire criminal proceeding against the father-in-law, cousin brother-in-law, elder brother-in-law, and his wife is hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- Kerala High Court - General and Non-Specific Allegations against the Sister-in-law, Proceedings Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 23 Jan 2023 10:42:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- Kerala High Court – General and Non-Specific Allegations against the Sister-in-law, Proceedings Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

GET THIS DOC IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023- In this article, the Kerala High Court held that there are general and non-specific allegations of cruelty, and demanding dowry against the Sister-in-law to attract the provision of Section 498A of IPC. The wife did not file any complaint for 18 years against the Sister-in-law for the alleged offenses, and there are omnibus and general allegations against the Sister-in-law in the complaint filed by the wife. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the Sister-in-law are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

__________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

According to the facts mentioned in the complaint filed by the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 28.03.2002, and after the marriage, the husband and wife started living together.

It is stated that within a year of marriage, the sister-in-law came to the house of the wife for her delivery, where the wife along with her husband were residing, and at that time, the sister-in-law exercised mental cruelty upon the wife by stating that the gold ornaments given to the wife by her parents were less than what was given to the sister-in-law by her parents.

It is also stated that the husband, mother-in-law, and sister-in-law subjected the wife to cruelty, and demanded more dowry from the wife.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

Upon this, the wife filed a private complaint in the year 2021, and the private complaint was forwarded to the police for investigation under Section 156(3) of CrPC, and later the case was registered for the offenses punishable under Sections 323, 498A, and 5069(i) read with Section 34 of IPC against the Sister-in-law, and after the investigation, the final report was filed.

The sister-in-law has filed the present petition to quash all further proceedings against her in the present case on the file of the Magistrate Court, Kodungallur.

_________________________________________________

Read the latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 01.11.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court - General and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 10.11.2022- Bombay High Court - No Specific and Precise allegations against the two In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

_______________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the sister-in-law submitted that even if the entire allegations alleged in the First Information Statement of the wife recorded by the police during the investigation under Section 161 of CrPC, along with the materials collected during the investigation are to be believed in total, no offenses under Sections 323, 498A and 506(i) of IPC are attracted against the sister-in-law.

Therefore, he prayed that the proceedings against the sister-in-law shall be quashed.

On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife submitted that there are sufficient allegations to attract the offense against the sister-in-law, and when the prima facie case is made out against the sister-in-law, the jurisdiction vested with the court under Section 482 of CrPC cannot be invoked.

Therefore, it is prayed that there is no question of quashing the proceedings against the sister-in-law, and the petition filed by the sister-in-law shall be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgement 04.01.2023- Jharkhand High Court – The Parents-in-law, and Brother-in-law are discharged from the case, Impugned order quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 16.11.2022- Himachal Pradesh High Court - General, Vague and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.
_______________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

Kahkshan Kausar Vs. State of Bihar

K. Subha Rao Vs. State of Telangana

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

The court heard all the statements submitted by the advocate appearing on behalf of the sister-in-law, the advocate appearing on behalf of the state, and the advocate appearing on behalf of the wife.

It is stated by the court that in the present case, there are general and non-specific allegations of demanding dowry, and cruelty upon the wife by the Sister-in-law to attract the provision of Section 498A of IPC, and the said incident took place in the year 2003, and till 2021, there was no complaint filed by the wife.

It is also stated by the court that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has on several instances expressed concerns over the misuse of the provision of Section 498A of IPC, and over the increased tendency of implicating the relatives, and family members of the husband in matrimonial disputes.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

It is further stated by the court that the Supreme Court has warned the courts from the proceedings against the husband's relatives, family members, and In-laws of the husband when there is no prima facie case against them.

The court also stated that in one of the above-mentioned cases, the Hon’ble Supreme court held that the court should be careful in the proceedings against the husband's distant relatives in the crimes pertaining to dowry deaths, and matrimonial disputes.

It was also held by the Supreme Court that the relatives and family members of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of general and omnibus allegations unless there are certain specific instances of their involvement in a crime are made out.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

It was further held that in the absence of any specific role attributed to the In-laws of the wife, it would be unjust to the In-laws if they are forced to go through the distress of the trial, and when there are allegations that are general and omnibus, then it does not warrant prosecution under Section 498A of IPC.

It is also stated by the court that in the present case, apart from the omnibus and general allegations against the Sister-in-law, that too for something which took place 18 years prior to the filing of the private complaint by the wife, there are no specific allegations against the Sister-in-law.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that no purpose will be served in the present proceedings against the sister-in-law, and therefore all further proceedings against the sister-in-law in the case on the file of the Magistrate Court, Kodungallur are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – General Allegations against the Husband and In-laws, Chargesheet Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 31.10.2022- Madras High Court - No Prima Facie material available against the Husband and Parents-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

______________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 18.01.2023

In this article, the Kerala High Court held that apart from the omnibus and general allegations against the Sister-in-law, that too for something which took place 18 years prior to the filing of the private complaint by the wife, there are no specific allegations against the Sister-in-law.

It is also held that there are general and non-specific allegations of demanding dowry, and cruelty by the Sister-in-law, and the said incident took place in the year 2003, and till 2021, there was no complaint filed by the wife.

Therefore, all further proceedings against the Sister-in-law are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgment 16.01.2023- Gujarat High Court- Non-Specific Allegations against the Parents-in-law, Sister-in-law, and Aunt of wife, FIR Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 19 Jan 2023 11:18:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgment 16.01.2023- Gujarat High Court- Non-Specific Allegations against the Parents-in-law, Sister-in-law, and Aunt of wife, FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgment 16.01.2023

GET THIS DOC ON PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023- In this article, the Gujarat High Court held that there are only general and non-specific allegations against the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife in the FIR file by the wife. The wife has not specified in her complaint as to when and how she was harassed and tortured, and what dowry demand was made to her, and the FIR is filed by the wife with an ulterior motive, and to exert pressure on her In-laws and aunt by moving the criminal machinery. Therefore, the criminal Proceedings against the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023

According to the facts of this case, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 27.04.2009 as per Hindu customs, rites, and rituals, and after some time of the marriage, the husband and wife started residing separately, and for many years the wife has been separately living from the In-laws.

It is stated that after the marriage, the husband separated from his parents and took an amount of Rs Ten Lakhs, and gold ornaments and stated that he will never return to his parent's house.

It is also stated that on 07.04.2018, the husband came to the house of his parents, and showed his inclination to stay with them, and the parents of the husband got suspicious of this request and asked the husband about his intention of coming back to their house almost after nine years.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023

It is further stated that the husband wanted to stay with his parents out of love and affinity, and out of the attachment of being the grandparents of three children of the husband, the parents of the husband granted him permission to stay, and from 18.04.2018 the husband and wife started residing with the parents and other family members of the husband.

It is also stated that on 03.05.2018 the wife threatened the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and other family members of the husband by consuming phenyl, and was later admitted to the hospital but no FIR was registered against the In-laws.

Later, the husband filed a civil suit dated 14.06.2018 for the partition and for other reliefs against his parents, and other family members, and on the same date the wife filed a complaint at the Police Station, district Surat for the offenses punishable under Sections 498A, 323, and 114 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife, and an FIR was registered against the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife.

The Parents-in-law, Sister-in-law, and Aunt of the wife have filed the present petition under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing and setting aside the FIR registered at the Police station for the offense punishable under Sections 498A, 323, and 114 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and the proceedings initiated against them.

_________________________________________________

Read The Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – General Allegations against the Husband and In-laws, Chargesheet Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023 – Calcutta High Court – No material for the proceedings against the Husband, Chargesheet Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

____________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife submitted that the aunt of the wife is living separately for many years, the impugned FIR is a classic case of misuse of Section 498A of IPC, and the complaint is filed by the wife in connivance with the husband only for the family property.

It is also submitted that the impugned FIR is nothing but a counterblast and the pressure by the wife upon the In-laws to succumb to the illogical and illegal demand of the property, and the parents of the husband had no other recourse but to give a public notice dated 09.05.2018 to the husband to disown him, as, during the stay of the husband with them, the husband initiated certain acts and transacted with a third party in connection with the property.

It is further submitted that the act of the husband to enter the house of his parents was with an ulterior motive to defame them, and the wife has very cleverly removed the husband from the FIR, and all the allegations are directed toward the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023

Therefore, he prayed for the quashing of the FIR, and the proceedings against the Parents-in-law, Sister-in-law, and Aunt of the wife.

On the other hand, the APP appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the wife was staying in the joint family and on minor domestic issues, the wife had been harassed by stating that she does not know how to cook, and she was harassed for bringing less dowry, and therefore, the wife was physically and mentally harassed.

It is also submitted that since the FIR is registered for the dowry demand, and for the cruelty, the opportunity is required to be granted to the wife to adduce the evidence.

Therefore, it is prayed that the petition filed by the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife shall be dismissed and there is no question of quashing the FIR filed by the wife.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash after charge sheet 19.09.2022- Bombay High Court-Omnibus and general allegations against Sister-in-law. FIR Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – No inquiry conducted by Magistrate before passing Summoning order, Proceedings against Husband and In-laws Quashed.
_____________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023

Chetnaben wife of Sureshbhai Rajyaguru and others Vs. State of Gujarat

Preeti Gupta Vs. State of Jharkhand

State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and others

Geeta Mehrotra and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023

It is stated by the Court that the wife has not given all the facts about her continuous stay from the year 2009 to 2018 in her complaint, and the husband was disowned by his father prior to the filing of the suit, and in the suit, the husband has asked to share the ancestral property of his parents and even threatened to commit suicide if he was not given the demanded share in the property, and such facts are reflected in the public notice given by the father of the husband.

It is also stated that in one of the above-mentioned cases the court held that once the FIR is registered under Sections 498A/ 406/ 323 of IPC and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, then even if the allegations are vague, exaggerated or unspecific or there is no evidence of any mental or physical harm inflicted upon woman, it comes as an easy tool in the hands of police and other agencies to hound the accused persons and arrest them till they get an anticipatory bail as the offense is cognizable and non-bailable.

It is further stated by the court that in the present case, the very approach of the husband and the wife are reflected by the way of public notice given by the father of the husband, and in the complaint, the wife has not specified as to when and how she was harassed and tortured, and what dowry demand was made by the In-laws.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023

The wife did not make the husband an accused in the case, and the FIR has been filed by the wife against the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife with an ulterior motive, and to exert pressure on them by moving the criminal machinery.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that after considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the court is of opinion that it is a fit case where the court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC in favor of the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife for securing justice, as the continuance of the proceedings against the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife will lead to wastage of judicial time.

Therefore, the petition is allowed, the FIR filed, and the proceedings initiated against the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife are hereby quashed and set aside.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash after Chargesheet 10.11.2022- Calcutta High Court - No Specific Allegations against the Father-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 22.09.2022- Chhattisgarh High Court- Vague allegations against Mother-in-law, Sister and Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

_____________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 16.01.2023

In this article, Gujarat High Court held that the wife has not specified in her complaint, when and how she was harassed and tortured, and what dowry demand was made by the In-laws and there are only general and non-specific allegations against the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife.

It is also held that the FIR has been filed by the wife against the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife with an ulterior motive, and to exert pressure on them by moving the criminal machinery.

Therefore, the FIR and the Proceedings against the parents-in-law, sister-in-law, and aunt of the wife are hereby quashed and set aside.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023- No inquiry conducted by Magistrate before passing Summoning order, Proceedings against Husband and In-laws Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 17 Jan 2023 11:43:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023 - No inquiry conducted by Magistrate before passing Summoning order, Proceedings against Husband and In-laws Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023

GET THIS DOCUMENT IN PDF WITH JUDGMENT DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023- In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that no inquiry under Section 202 of CrPC was conducted by the Magistrate, and the non-compliance of Section 202 of CrPC by the Magistrate before issuing of the process is an abuse of process of law. The Magistrate did not comply with the provisions of Section 202 of CrPC, and the Magistrate did not conduct any inquiry by himself or did not direct an investigation as required under Section 202 of CrPC, before directing the issue of process. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the husband and In-laws are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023

According to the facts mentioned in the complaint filed by the wife, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 24.11.2014 as per Hindu rites, traditions, and customs, and at the time of marriage, the father of the wife gave a huge amount of cash and several bhoris of gold ornaments and other articles as per the demand of the husband and In-laws.

It is stated that after the marriage between the wife and her husband, the wife started residing at her husband’s house with the In-laws, and the husband and In-laws took away her gold ornaments, sold them, and swindled the sale proceeds.

It is also stated that after a few days of the marriage, the husband and In-laws started demanding a sum of Rs 50,000 from the father of the wife but, the father of the wife failed to meet such demands, and the wife was assaulted by the husband and In-laws and was not given proper food and medical treatment when the wife fell ill, and the wife bore all torture in silence.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023

It is further stated that after some time, the wife became pregnant but in spite of that the husband and In-laws inflicted mental and physical torture upon the wife over the issue of Rs Fifty Thousand.

It is also stated that on 21.01.2016, the wife gave birth to a female child, and as a result of which the husband and In-laws stopped talking to the wife, and demanded a further sum of Rs. three lakhs from the father of the wife as expenses towards the marriage of the daughter of the wife.

When the father of the wife got to know about such demand, he handed over a sum of Rs. One Lakh to the husband, and requested the husband and In-laws not to torture the wife, and the torture on the wife was stopped for some time.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023

Furthermore, it is stated that after a few months, the husband and In-laws demanded a further sum of Rs. Two Lakhs, but when the father of the wife expressed his inability to pay any more money, the husband and In-laws abused the wife in filthy language, and even assaulted the wife.

On 26.01.2018 morning the husband and In-laws with a view to killing the wife went to bring kerosene, and the wife somehow managed to escape from her matrimonial home along with her daughter and took shelter at her parental home, and since then the husband and In-laws didn't take any information about the welfare of the wife.

Upon this, the wife filed a complaint petition under sections 498A/ 323/ 34 of IPC and section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act before the Magistrate, Paschim Midnapore, and after receiving the complaint petition the Magistrate passed the order dated 19.04.2018 to take cognizance of the offense.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023

Later, the case was transferred to the Magistrate of the second court for trial and disposal, and on 23.07.2018, the Magistrate upon examination of the wife passed the order to find out a prima facie case made against the Husband and In-laws under Sections 498A/ 323/ 34 of IPC and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and issued summons against the husband and In-laws.

The husband and In-laws have filed the present Revision petition for quashing the proceedings of the case pending before the court of Magistrate under Sections 498A/ 323/ 34 of IPC and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

_________________________________________________

Read Latest Article- 498A Quash after Chargesheet 27.09.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court-No Specific Allegation made against Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 31.10.2022- Madras High Court - No Prima Facie material available against the Husband and Parents-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

________________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband and In-laws submitted that the proceedings of this case are a gross abuse of the process of the law and court, and if it is allowed to continue it will degenerate into a weapon of persecution and harassment, and the same is liable to be quashed.

It is also submitted that the impugned proceedings are malafide and vexatious, and has been initiated only with a motive to harass the husband and In-laws, and continuance of such proceedings as far as it is related to the husband and In-laws is liable to be quashed.

It is further submitted that the Magistrate has made an error in law by taking cognizance of the offenses on the basis of the complaint petition without compliance with Section 202 of CrPC, and further proceedings have no basis whatsoever. The husband and In-laws are permanent residents of Jharkhand, and the complaint was filed in Midnapore, and if the alleged acts constitute offenses under Sections 498A/ 323/ 34 of IPC occurred in Jharkhand, then the place of inquiry should also be at Jharkhand.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023

It is also submitted that in the present case, the husband and In-laws are residing in Jharkhand, and it is beyond the area where the Magistrate is exercising his jurisdiction, and it is mandatory on the part of the Magistrate to conduct an investigation or Inquiry before issuing the process, and the same was not done in this case, and the order of taking cognizance is bad in liable to quashed and set aside.

Furthermore, it is submitted that the requirement of conducting an inquiry or an investigation before issuing the process is not just an empty formality, and the witnesses need to be examined, whereas according to Section 200, only the examination of the wife is necessary with an option of examination of witnesses.

This exercise by the Magistrate is an obligation on him to apply his mind carefully, and satisfy himself that the allegations in the complaint when considered, the inquiry conducted, and the statements recorded would prima facie constitute the offense for which the complaint petition is filed, and in the present case, the allegations made in the complaint petition do not prima facie constitute any offense or make out any case against the husband and In-laws.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the proceedings against the husband and In-laws.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash after Chargesheet 10.11.2022- Bombay High Court - No Specific and Precise allegations against the two In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 10.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - Vague Allegations against the Sister-in-law and Another In-law. F.I.R Quashed.
____________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgment 13.01.2023

S.S. Binu Vs. State of West Bengal

Birla Corporation Ltd. Vs. Adventz Investments and Holdings

National Bank of Oman Vs. Barakara Abdul Aziz and Another

Mehmood Ul Rehaman Vs. Khazir Mohammad Tunda and Others

Bhushan Kumar and Another Vs. State(NCT Of Delhi) and Another

Chief Enforcement Officer Vs. Videocon International Ltd.

Vijay Dhanuka and others Vs. Najima Mamtaj and Others

Abhijit Pawar Vs. Hemant Madhukar Nimbalkar and Another

Pepsi Foods Ltd. and Another Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate and Others

GHCL Employees Stock Option Trust Vs. India Infoline Limited

Punjab National Bank and Others Vs. Surendra Prasad Sinha

Jagdish Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and Another

Chandra Deo Singh Vs. Prokash Chandra Bose @ Chabi Bose and Another

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023

The court stated that in several of the above-mentioned cases, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the object of an inquiry under Section 202 of CrPC is for the magistrate so that he can scrutinize the materials produced before the court by the person who filed the complaint so that the Magistrate can satisfy himself that the complaint is not false and that there are materials and evidence which form a sufficient ground for the Magistrate to proceed with the issue process under Section 204 of CrPC.

It is the duty of the Magistrate to consider every fact that would establish the bona fides of the complaint and the person who filed the complaint, and the Magistrate conducting an investigation under Section 202 of CrPC has full power to collect evidence and examine the matter, and the Magistrate shall consider whether a prima facie case is being made out or not, and the magistrate shall apply his mind to the materials found before satisfying himself that there are sufficient grounds for the proceedings against the accused person.

It is a well-settled principle of law that Section 202 of CrPC makes it an obligation upon the Magistrate that before summoning the accused person who is residing beyond the Magistrate’s jurisdiction, the Magistrate shall conduct an inquiry into the case himself or direct an investigation by a Police Officer for finding out whether there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused person or not.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023

The court also stated that in the present case, the Magistrate did not comply with the provisions of Section 202 of CrPC, even though the husband and In-laws reside outside the Jurisdiction of the court, and the Magistrate did not conduct any inquiry by himself or did not direct an investigation as required under Section 202 of CrPC, before directing the issue of process, and such order is an abuse of process of law.

The court further stated that the proceedings in the present case are for the offenses punishable under Sections 498A/ 323/ 34 of IPC and section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and the nature of the complaint petition also needs an inquiry under Section 202 of CrPC.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that the non-compliance of Section 202 of CrPC by the Magistrate before issuing the process is an abuse of the process of law, and the order dated 23.07.2018 passed by the Magistrate is hereby quashed, and the matter is remitted to the Magistrate to consider the matter afresh under Section 202 of CrPC, and as per the provisions of law.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgement 15.09.2022- Telangana High Court - Vague allegations against Parent-in-law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – General Allegations against the Husband and In-laws, Chargesheet Quashed.

_______________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 13.01.2023

In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that the Magistrate did not comply with the provisions of Section 202 of CrPC, and the Magistrate did not conduct any inquiry by himself or did not direct an investigation as required under Section 202 of CrPC, before directing the issue of process, and such order is an abuse of process of law.

It is also held that the Magistrate's non-compliance with Section 202 of CrPC before issuing the process is an abuse of the process of law, and the order dated 23.07.2018 passed by the Magistrate is hereby quashed.

Therefore, the proceeding against the Husband and In-laws is hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023 - Calcutta High Court - No material for the proceedings against the Husband, Chargesheet Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 14 Jan 2023 12:23:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023 – Calcutta High Court – No material for the proceedings against the Husband, Chargesheet Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023

GET THIS DOCUMENT IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023- In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that the materials and the chargesheet do not prima facie make out a case of cognizable offense against the husband, and there are no materials found for the proceedings against the husband. The wife is unwilling to return to the husband, and the wife has filed the present case only to harass the husband so that she cannot be forced to return. Therefore, the Criminal Proceedings against the husband are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

___________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023

According to the facts of this case, the husband is a central government employee and the wife is a school teacher, and the marriage between the wife and the husband was solemnized on 12.06.2010 and after the marriage, the husband and wife started to live together with husband’s other family members.

It is stated that the wife was arrogant in nature and disliked living and residing in a joint family of the husband, and after the honeymoon, the husband took the wife to his quarter allotted by the government, and the wife and her husband started living there.

It is also stated that the wife became pregnant and on 14.10.2010 the wife left the quarter with all her belongings with her mother without informing the husband, and on 17.04.2011 the wife gave birth to a male child.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023

It is further stated that in spite of the husband’s best efforts, and even after filing a case for restitution of conjugal rights and after the efforts of reconciliation, the wife did not return to live with her husband.

It is also stated that in the year 2014, the wife filed a complaint dated 01.12.2014 at the police station against her husband, and a case was registered on 18.12.2014, and on 28.01.2015, the investigation ended, and a chargesheet was filed for the offense under Sections 498A/188 of IPC against the husband.

The present Revision Petition is filed by the husband for quashing of criminal proceedings arising out of the case dated 18.12.2014 along with the chargesheet dated 28.01.2015 under Sections 498A/ 188 of IPC.

_________________________________________________

Read Latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – General Allegations against the Husband and In-laws, Chargesheet Quashed.
498A Quash Judgement 15.09.2022- Telangana High Court - Vague allegations against Parent-in-law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

____________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband submitted that the chargesheet was filed without any cogent documents, the complaint filed by the wife has no force, and the continuance of the present case is nothing but an abuse of the process of law.

It is also submitted that the investigation officer willfully failed and neglected to consider the documents submitted by the husband, and filed the chargesheet arbitrarily, without investigating the case properly.

It is further submitted that the initiation and continuation of the proceeding against the husband have amounted to an abuse of the process of court and law, and the magistrate committed an error in law and procedure in taking cognizance against the husband on the basis of the chargesheet without considering the materials available in the case diary.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023

It is also submitted that the Magistrate ought to appreciate that when the wife deliberately failed and neglected to comply with the order dated 27.02.2013 passed by the district judge and even after receiving the request letter dated 18.03.2013 written by the husband, the complaint was lodged in a preplanned manner to avoid residing with the husband.

Therefore, he prayed for the impugned order passed by the Magistrate taking cognizance of the chargesheet, and the proceedings against the husband are liable to be quashed.

On the other hand, the advocate appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the chargesheet was filed after proper investigation, and there are pieces of evidence of a prima facie case of a cognizable offense against the husband.

Therefore, it is prayed that the revision petition filed by the husband is liable to be dismissed.

_________________________________________________

498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023- In Complaint Case – The summoning orders shall not be passed without applying the Judicial Mind.
498A Quash Judgement 04.01.2023- Jharkhand High Court – The Parents-in-law, and Brother-in-law are discharged from the case, Impugned order quashed.
___________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023

Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.

Rajesh Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.

Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr.

Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr.

Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.

G.V. Rao Vs. L.H.V. Prasad & Ors.

K. Subba Rao Vs. The State of Telangana

M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Vs. State of Maharashtra

Ranveer Upadhyay & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.

Umesh Kumar Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr.

Rajiv Thapar Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor

State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma

Sheonandan Paswan Vs. State of Bihar

Parkash Singh Badal Vs. State of Punjab

State of A.P. Vs. Golconda Linga Swamy

K. Karunakaran Vs. State of Kerala

State of Maharashtra Vs. Salman Salim Khan

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023

The court stated that in cases of such nature, the High court can quash the proceedings if the ingredients of the alleged offense are not proved, and also if the court is convinced that the accused person is innocent, and wrongly implicated.

The court stated in one of the above-mentioned cases that the aim of incorporating section 498A was to prevent cruelty committed upon a woman by the husband and the In-laws, by facilitating rapid state intervention, but it is also true that nowadays matrimonial litigation has increased in the country, and now there is greater friction and disaffection surrounding the marriage more than ever, and it has resulted in use such provisions as instruments to settle personal scores against the In-laws and husband.

It is also stated by the court that the courts should be extremely cautious and careful in dealing with such complaints, and must take sensible realities into consideration while dealing with matrimonial disputes and cases, and the allegations of the complaint shall be scrutinized with great circumspection and care.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023

The courts should also be careful in the proceedings against the distant relatives of the husband in crimes pertaining to dowry death and matrimonial disputes, and the relatives should not be roped in just on the basis of omnibus allegations unless there are some specific instances of the relative’s involvement in the crime.

In the present case, the court stated that the marriage between the husband and wife took place on 12.06. 2010, and the wife left the husband’s house on 14.10.2010 after the wife got pregnant, and the wife filed the present case on 18.12.2014 which is four years after she left, and she has alleged offense under Section 498A/ 188 of IPC.

The court also stated that the district judge directed the husband to take his wife and children to his house and lead a happy conjugal life in the case for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the husband, and it was the wife who did not comply with the said order as the husband sent a letter dated 18.03.201 by post to the wife requesting her to come back, but the wife did not come back with the child.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023

The court further stated that these facts further strengthen the case of the husband, and it shows that the wife is unwilling to return to the husband, and the wife has filed the present case only to harass the husband so that she cannot be forced to return.

The court also stated that the materials in the case diary and the chargesheet do not prima facie make out a case of cognizable offense against the husband, and there are no materials found for the proceedings against the husband, and it is a fit case for the court to exercise its inherent power.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that in this case there is no substance in the allegations against the husband, and there is no material to make out the complexity of the husband in a cognizable offense, and the proceedings in this case, shall be quashed.

Therefore, the criminal revision petition is allowed, and the proceedings arising out of the case dated 18.12.2014 and the chargesheet dated 28.01.2015 against the husband are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash Judgment 14.09.2022- Bombay High Court-No specific allegations against parents-in law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 04.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - No Specific Allegations against Three In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

_________________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 10.01.2023

In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that the wife is unwilling to return to the husband, and the wife has filed the present case only to harass the husband so that she cannot be forced to return.

It is also held that the materials in the case diary and the chargesheet do not prima facie make out a case of cognizable offense against the husband, and there are no materials found for the proceedings against the husband.

Therefore, the proceedings and the chargesheet against the husband are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023- Calcutta High Court - General Allegations against the Husband and In-laws, Chargesheet Quashed.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 12 Jan 2023 12:49:00 +0000

498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023- Calcutta High Court – General Allegations against the Husband and In-laws, Chargesheet Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023- In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that the allegations in the written complaint filed by the wife are general in nature, and all allegations are made only with the intention to harass the husband and In-laws. The facts, materials, and the chargesheet do not make out a prima facie case of a cognizable offense against the husband and In-laws, and there is no material available for proceeding against the husband and In-laws. Therefore, the criminal proceedings against the Husband and In-laws are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

__________________________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

According to the facts of the case, the marriage between the wife and her husband was solemnized on 04.04.2009 and the marriage was registered on 22.04.2009 and the wife started living with her husband.

It is stated that the relationship between the wife and her husband started deteriorating after the marriage, and the wife started misbehaving with the husband.

It is also stated that on 12.10.2015 the wife left her matrimonial home, and in spite of the best efforts and attempts of the husband and In-laws to bring the wife back to her matrimonial home, the wife refused to return.

Case Brief- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

It is further stated that later, the husband filed a suit for divorce before the District Court, Howrah and upon this, the wife filed a complaint at the Police Station against the husband and In-laws under Sections 498A/ 323/ 324/ 313/ 307/ 34 of IPC, and a case was registered on 03.11.2016.

Later, the police filed a chargesheet dated 30.04.2017 against the husband and In-laws, and the Magistrate took cognizance, and the suit was later decreed exparte as the wife suddenly disappeared.

The husband and In-laws have filed the present revision petition for quashing of the criminal proceedings arising out of the case dated 03.11.2016, along with the chargesheet dated 30.04.2017 under Sections 498A/ 323/ 34 of IPC read with Section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

_________________________________________________

Read the latest Article- 498A Quash Judgement 01.11.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court - General and Omnibus Allegations against the Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 10.10.2022- Gujarat High Court - Vague Allegations against the Sister-in-law and Another In-law. F.I.R Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

_____________________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the husband and In-laws submitted that the investigation officer of this case refused to receive any documents from the husband and In-laws and filed the chargesheet arbitrarily, in spite of there being no prima facie case of any cognizable offense against the husband and In-laws.

It is also submitted that the initiation and continuation of the proceedings have amounted to an abuse of the process of the law and the court.

It is further submitted that the magistrate committed an error in law and procedure in taking cognizance on the basis of the chargesheet dated 30.04.2017.

Arguments- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

It is also submitted that before taking cognizance on the basis of the chargesheet under Section 498A/ 323/ 34 of IPC and section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the magistrate should have considered the fact that when the In-laws never spent a single night with the wife and her husband, then allegations under Sections 498A/ 323/ 34 of IPC cannot sustain at all.

Furthermore, it is submitted that the allegations and the materials furnished in support of the allegations do not disclose the commission of the offenses as alleged by the husband and In-laws, and the summoning order passed by the Magistrate is not maintainable in law.

It is also submitted that after the divorce from the husband, the wife is married again to some other man, and some photos of the same have been submitted before the court.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the proceedings and the summoning order passed by the Magistrate against the husband and In-laws.

_________________________________________________

498A Quashing after Divorce 29.09.2022- Calcutta High Court- False Allegations found against the Husband. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash Judgement 31.10.2022- Madras High Court - No Prima Facie material available against the Husband and Parents-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

___________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & others Vs. State of Bihar & others

Rajesh Sharma and others Vs. State of U.P. & Another

Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another

Preeti Gupta and another Vs. State of Jharkhand and another

Geeta Mehrotra and another Vs. State of U.P. and another

G.V. Rao Vs. L.H.V. Prasad and others

K. Subha Rao Vs. State of Telangana

M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Vs. State of Maharashtra

Ranveer Upadhyay and another Vs. State of U.P. and another

Umesh Kumar Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and another

Rajiv Thapar Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor

State of Bihar Vs. P.P Sharma

Sheonandan Paswan Vs. State of Bihar

Parkash Singh Badal Vs. State of Punjab

State of A.P. Vs. Golconda Linga Swamy

K. Karunakaran Vs. State of Kerala

State of Maharashtra Vs. Salman Salim Khan

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

It is stated by the court that the High Court can quash the proceedings if the court is convinced that the accused person is innocent and falsely implicated, and it can be done if the ingredients of the offenses alleged are not present.

The court also stated that in one of the above-mentioned cases, the court has held that in cases of such nature, the courts should be careful in the proceedings against the distant relatives of the husband in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths, and the relatives of the husband should only be roped in when the specific instances of the relative’s involvement in the crime are made out.

It is also previously decided by the courts that in a case where there is some substance in the allegations, and there is material to substantiate the complicity of the accused, then the case is to be examined in its full summary, and the proceedings should not be quashed on the ground that the same has been initiated with mala-fides to wreak vengeance.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

It is a well-established proposition of the law that the material collected during the investigation, and the pieces of evidence led in the court decided the fate of the accused person, and the allegations of mala-fides against the informant are of consequence, and it cannot be the basis for quashing of the proceedings.

The court further stated that in the present case, the marriage took place in the year 2009 and the complaint has been lodged in the year 2016 which is after seven years of marriage, and the allegations in the written complaint filed by the wife are general in nature, stating that the wife was tortured since the day after her marriage.

The court also stated that the wife has alleged that she was forced to have an abortion four times, but during the investigation, the wife has stated that she did not go to any doctor during her abortion, and because of that she cannot produce any medical document.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

Furthermore, the court stated that all the allegations made in the complaint seem without any basis, and only with the intention to harass the husband and In-laws, and the ingredients of the offenses alleged are not present in this case.

The court also stated that the facts and materials of the present case and the chargesheet do not make out a prima facie case of a cognizable offense against the husband and In-laws, and there is no material available for proceeding against the husband and In-laws toward the trial, and it is a fit case where the inherent power of court shall be exercised.

The court further stated that in a case, the chargesheet and the evidence placed in support thereof form the base to take or to refuse cognizance by the competent court, and the ultimate test is to check whether the allegations have any substance or not.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

In view of the above discussion, the court held that there is no substance in the allegations and no material exists to make out the complicity of the husband and In-laws in a cognizable offense, and the proceedings, in this case, shall be quashed.

Therefore, the criminal revision petition is allowed. The proceedings arising out of the case dated 03.11.2016 and the chargesheet dated 30.04.2017 under Sections 498A/ 323/ 34 of IPC are read with Section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are hereby quashed.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash after chargesheet 22.06.2021- Delayed complaint led to quash FIR against Husband and Parents-in-law.

498a quash after chargesheet 31.08.2021 - Brother-in-law, his wife and relatives living separately and no specific allegations against them. FIR Quashed.

________________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Quash Judgement 09.01.2023

In this article, the Calcutta High Court held that the allegations in the written complaint filed by the wife are general in nature, and all the allegations made in the complaint seem without any basis, and only with the intention to harass the husband and In-laws.

It is also held that the facts and materials of the present case and the chargesheet do not make out a prima facie case of a cognizable offense against the husband and In-laws, and there is no material available for proceeding against the husband and In-laws.

Therefore, the proceedings and the chargesheet against the Husband and In-laws are hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights

498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023- In Complaint Case - The summoning orders shall not be passed without applying the Judicial Mind.

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 10 Jan 2023 11:22:00 +0000

498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023- In Complaint Case – The summoning orders shall not be passed without applying the Judicial Mind.

498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023

GET THIS DOCUMENT IN PDF WITH CASE DETAILS

Read More Judgements on 498a Quash

498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023- In Complaint Case – In this article, the Allahabad High Court held that no judicial mind was applied before the passing of the summoning order, and the order is not passed after following the procedure of law, and therefore, cannot be accepted as a proper judicial order. The impugned summoning order dated 20.05.2022 passed by the Magistrate is cryptic and does not stand the test laid down by the court. Therefore, the summoning order passed against the accused persons is hereby set aside.

_________________________________________________

Contact For Counseling to discuss Your case For Right Solutions

_________________________________________________________________________

Case Brief- 498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023

In this case, a complaint has been filed in the police station, district Rampur under sections 498A and 323 of IPC and Section 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Later a summoning order dated 20.05.2022 has been passed by the Magistrate, Rampur, and the entire proceedings of this complaint case are pending in the Court of Magistrate.

The present application under Section 482 of CrPC is filed in the High Court to challenge the summoning order dated 20.05.2022 passed by the Magistrate, Rampur.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash Judgement 15.09.2022- Telangana High Court - Vague allegations against Parent-in-law, sister and brother-in-law. FIR Quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 26.09.2022- Andhra Pradesh High Court-Vague and bald allegations against Four In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

BUY "498A QUASH" - EBOOK - A GUIDE TO 498A QUASH

__________________________________________________________

Arguments- 498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023

The advocate appearing on behalf of the person who filed the application submitted that the summoning order impugned in the present application is wholly arbitrary, and therefore the summoning order shall be set aside by the court.

It is also submitted that the Magistrate has simply recorded a conclusion that on the basis of the complaint filed, the statement of the person who filed the complaint, and his witnesses, prima facie an offense under Section 392 of IPC appears to have been committed.

It is further submitted that the conclusion recorded by the Magistrate is not preceded by a discussion about the allegations made in the complaint or statements of the person who filed the complaint, and his witnesses as recorded under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC.

Arguments- 498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023

It is also submitted that in the absence of the findings recorded by the court of Magistrate, on the basis of allegations made, the statements of the person who filed the complaint, and statements of witnesses, no prima facie satisfaction was recorded by the Magistrate for summoning the person who filed the application under Section 498A, 323 of IPC and section 3/ 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Therefore, he prayed for quashing the summoning order dated 20.05.2022 passed by the Magistrate against the person who filed the application.

_________________________________________________

498A Quash after Chargesheet 10.11.2022- Bombay High Court - No Specific and Precise allegations against the two In-laws. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 10.11.2022- Calcutta High Court - No Specific Allegations against the Father-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.
_________________________________________________

Referred Judgements- 498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023

Mahboob and others Vs. State of U.P. and another

Smt. Shiv Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P. and another

Hariram Verma and others Vs. State of U.P. and another

M/s Pepsi Food Ltd. and another Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate and others

Paul George Vs. State

S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Neeta Bhalla

Anita Malhotra Vs. Apparel Export Promotion Council

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023

In one of the above-mentioned cases, the court has held that when the Magistrate has not conducted any inquiry to satisfy himself that the allegations made in the complaint constitute an offense, and when there is nothing on record to show that the Magistrate has applied his mind to arrive at a prima facie conclusion, there is no ground for proceedings against the petitioner under Section 204 of CrPC.

The court also held that if a Magistrate has passed a cryptic order simply by stating that the statements of the person who filed the complaint as well as the statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 200 and 202 of CrPC are perused, and the accused person is summoned, such order itself is illegal which cannot stand the test of law.

The court also stated that the Magistrate is required to mention in the order about the prima facie satisfaction for summoning the accused person, and the order must reflect that the Magistrate has exercised his jurisdiction in accordance with the law, after satisfying himself about the allegations made in the complaint.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023

The court further stated that the Magistrate shall note the contents of the complaint and pieces of evidence under Sections 200 and 202 of CrPC in the order, and there shall be a discussion done by the Magistrate about the evidence, and it shall be considered as, what overt act has been committed by the accused.

At the stage of summoning, the Magistrate is not required to carefully examine or evaluate the evidence, and he is not required to record the detailed reasons, and only a brief order which indicates the application of mind is expected of the magistrate at that stage.

Furthermore, it is stated by the court that the Magistrate should consider the facts of the case before passing the summoning order, and the order should not lack the reflection of the application of the Judicial Mind, otherwise, the order cannot be accepted as a proper legal order passed after following the procedure of law.

Court’s Opinion- 498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023

It is a well-settled principle of law that at the time of issuing of the process the magistrate is only required to see the allegations made in the complaint, and when the allegations made in the complaint or the chargesheet do not constitute an offense against a person then the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

It is also a well-settled principle that when the court summons an accused person, the court has to see prima facie evidence, and the inquiry under section 202 CrPC is done to find the truth of the allegations made in the complaint, and the passing of a summoning order is a very important matter which initiates a criminal proceeding against a person, and such orders shall not be passed summarily or without applying judicial mind.

In view of the above discussion, the court held that it is clear that the impugned summoning order passed by the Magistrate is cryptic, and does not stand the test laid down by the court.

Therefore, the present criminal application is allowed, and the summoning order dated 20.05.2022 passed by Magistrate, Rampur is hereby quashed, and the concerned Magistrate is given the order to pass a fresh order in the light of the observations made in this case.

_________________________________________________

Buy E-Books on 498A and Section 125 Cr.P.C

498A Quash after Chargesheet 27.09.2022- Madras High Court-No Prima Facie material available against Parents-in-law and Sister-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

498A Quash after Chargesheet 22.09.2022- Chhattisgarh High Court- Vague allegations against Mother-in-law, Sister and Brother-in-law. F.I.R Quashed.

___________________________________________________________

Conclusion- 498A Summoning Order Quash Judgment 04.01.2023

In this article, the Allahabad High Court held that the Magistrate is required to mention in the order about the prima facie satisfaction for summoning the accused person, and the order must reflect that the Magistrate has exercised his jurisdiction in accordance with the law after satisfying himself about the allegations made in the complaint.

It is also held that the impugned summoning order passed by the Magistrate is cryptic, and does not stand the test laid down by the court.

Therefore, the summoning order dated 20.05.2022 passed by the Magistrate against the applicant is hereby quashed.

Follow us On Facebook, Youtube, Twitter , Instagram

Join Facebook Group - Apaizers Mens Rights