Latest 2022 Judgements in 498a IPC
Here are the 5 latest judgements on 498A i am sharing with you which will
definitely help you in your case for Quashing of charges, criminal Trials etc. I have
researched these judgements specifically for 498A cases.
- Anita Rai vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (13.06.2022 – MPHC) :
MANU/MP/1402/2022
This case was filed in High Court of MP for quashing of FIR by the petitioner
(mother-in-law) against the coimplainant. Here, the main allegations by the
complainant are her husband i.e. son of petitioner who has allegedly not lived with
her for even two months in a period of two years of marriage and has constantly
raised demand of dowry from her. He is alleged not to have assisted her mentally
or financially. He is also alleged not to have made any effort for him and
complainant to live together as husband and wife. Allegations are mainly against
husband of complainant but along with him, present petitioner who is
mother-in-law of complainant has also been implicated but there is no specific
allegations against her. Petitioner is an aged person and is shown to have been
living at Jodhpur and her son is in Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force and is posted
in Arunachal Pradesh. There is no allegation that petitioner and complainant have
even lived in same house. Allegations levelled against petitioner are vague and
omnibus and have been made solely for purpose of implicating her in a criminal
case. There is no specific allegation against petitioner nor has any precise indecent
been disclosed in FIR against her. Hence petition is allowed and FIR registered
against petitioner for offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 323 of IPC and 3/4
of DP Act, is hereby quash. - S. Ameer ahmed and Ors. vs. The State of Telangana and Ors.
(13.06.2022 – TLHC) : MANU/TL/1094/2022
This case was filed for quashing of FIR registered under Section 498A of Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
Petitions were filed by petitioners to quash proceedings of criminal case pending
before court below. Whether there was sufficient material to proceed against
Petitioners for offences alleged against them, or whether same were liable to be
quashed.
Held, considering allegations leveled by complainant against these Petitioners in
her complaint, they did not appear to be serious enough but were incorporated to
harass entire family to settle her personal scores with them – Hence it was
considered fit to quash charges against Petitioners no. 4 to 8 for offences under
section 498A of IPC and sections 3 and 4 of Act, taken cognizance against them in
CC no. 1027 of 2014 on file of court below – In result, criminal petition no. 8699 of
2017 was allowed quashing proceedings against all Petitioners in CC no. 407 of
2016 on file of court below and criminal petition no. 13595 of 2016 was
allowed-in-part quashing proceedings against Petitioners nos. 4, 5, 6, 7 and 9 in CC
no. 1027 of 2014 on file of court below – Criminal petition was dismissed against
Petitioners/accused no. 1 to 3 and veracity of allegations made against them could
be decided during course of trial. - Kahkashan Kausar and Ors. vs. State of Bihar and Ors. (08.02.2022 –
SC) : MANU/SC/0163/2022
The Complainant (R5) instituted criminal complaint against her husband and the
Appellants alleging demand for dowry and harassment. Court took cognizance for
the offence under Section 498A, 323 Indian Penal Code against the husband and
issued summons. This dispute was eventually resolved and Respondent No. 5
herein came back to the matrimonial home.Subsequently, R5 gave another written
complaint for registration of FIR against her husband and the Appellants herein
alleging Accused of pressurizing the Respondent wife to purchase a car as dowry,
and threatened to forcibly terminate her pregnancy if the demands were not
met.Aggrieved, the Husband and Appellant sough quashing of FIR which was
dismissed vide impugned judgment. Hence, the present appeal.
Court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse of Section
498A Indian Penal Code and the increased tendency of implicating relatives of the
husband in matrimonial disputes, without analysing the long term ramifications of
a trial on the complainant as well as the Accused. Court by way of its judgments
has been warned from proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of the husband
when no prima facie case is made out against them.[18]
Upon a perusal of the contents of the FIR, it is revealed that general allegations are
levelled against the Appellants.
Therefore, upon consideration of the relevant circumstances and in the absence of
any specific role attributed to the Accused Appellants, it would be unjust if the
Appellants are forced to go through the tribulations of a trial, i.e., general and
omnibus allegations cannot manifest in a situation where the relatives of the
complainant’s husband are forced to undergo trial. A criminal trial leading to an
eventual acquittal also inflicts severe scars upon the Accused, and such an exercise
must therefore be discouraged. The impugned F.I.R. No. 248 of 2019 against the
Appellants Under Sections 341, 323, 379, 354, 498A read with Section 34 Indian
Penal Code stands quashed. - Meera vs. State by the Inspector of Police, Thiruvotriyur Police Station,
Chennai (11.01.2022 – SC) : MANU/SC/0034/2022
The mother-in-law/ Accused No. 2 has preferred present appeal against judgment
upholding Trial Court’s judgment convicting her of the offence alleged. She
alongwith others were alleged of harassing the deceased and subjecting her to
torture/cruelty for want of jewels. The deceased allegedly had immolated herself as
a result of which she died. By impugned judgment, High Court acquitted all the
Accused for the offence under Section 306 IPC and also set aside conviction in
respect of Accused Nos. 1 and 3 under Section 498A but maintained conviction
and sentence in respect of Accused No. 2. hence , the appeal was filed in SC and It
has been established and proved that the deceased was subjected to torture/cruelty
by the Appellant – mother-in-law with regard to jewels. There are concurrent
findings of facts recorded by both the Courts below on the harassment and/or
torture and/or cruelty by the Appellant – Accused No. 2 with regard to jewelson
appreciation of evidence. Appellant rightly held guilty for the offence under
Section 498A Indian Penal Code.
Merely because long time has passed in concluding the trial and/or deciding the
appeal by the High Court, is no ground not to impose the punishment and/or to
impose the sentence already undergone. It is to be noted that the Appellant –
mother-in-law is held to be guilty for the offence under Section 498A of Indian
Penal Code. However, considering the fact that Appellant reported to be
approximately 80 years old, as a mitigating circumstance, sentence reduced from
one year R.I. to three months R.I. with fine imposed by Trial Court. - Achin Phulre and Ors. vs. The State of M.P. and Ors. (16.02.2022 –
MPHC) : MANU/MP/0308/2022
This petition was filed for Quashing of FIR registered under Section 498A of
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act,
1986and Section 179 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)- Appeal sought to
quash of FIR registered against them under Section 498A of IPC and Section 3 and
4 of Act – Whether woman forced to leave her matrimonial home on account of
acts and conducts that constitute cruelty can initiate and access legal process within
jurisdiction of Courts where she is forced to take shelter with parents or other
family members? – Held, object behind Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act is to provide civil remedy to victims of domestic violence as against
remedy in criminal law which is what is provided under Section 498A of IPC –
Definition of Domestic Violence in Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Act, 2005 contemplates harm or injuries that endanger health, safety, life, limb or
well-being – Said definition would certainly have close connection with
Explanation A & B to Section 498A , IPC which defines cruelty -Provisions
contained in Section 498A of IPC encompasses both mental as well as physical
well-being of wife – Even silence of wife may have underlying element of
emotional distress and mental agony – Her sufferings at parental home though may
be directly attributable to commission of acts of cruelty by husband at matrimonial
home would be consequences of acts committed at matrimonial home – Such
consequences, by itself, would amount to distinct offences committed at parental
home where she has taken shelter -Adverse effects on mental health in parental
home though on account of acts committed in matrimonial home would amount to
commission of cruelty – Consequences of cruelty committed at matrimonial home
results in repeated offences being committed at parental home – This is kind of
offences contemplated under Section 179 CrPC which would squarely be
applicable to present case – Courts at place where wife takes shelter after leaving or
driven away from matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by
husband or his relatives, would, dependent on factual situation, also have
jurisdiction to entertain complaint alleging commission of offences under Section
498A of IPC – Appeal dismissed. - Bonus Judgement–Our Firm Case…In Sumeert Rathore &ORS Vs. State the Delhi High Court has recently quashed charges of 376/354/498a/406/34 IPC. In this case initially court was reluctant to quash charges of 376 IPC but we gave a supreme court judgement.. Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT
of Delhi, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1030, while quashing an FIR under Section
376 IPC, had observed as under:
“…13. It can thus be seen that this Court has clearly held that
though the Court should be slow in quashing the proceedings
wherein heinous and serious offences are involved, the High
Court is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there exists
material for incorporation of such an offence or as to whether
there is sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving
the charge for the offence charged with. The Court has also to
take into consideration as to whether the settlement between the
parties is going to result into harmony between them which may
improve their mutual relationship.
14. The Court has further held that it is also relevant to consider
as to what is stage of the proceedings. It has been observed that
if an application is made at a belated stage wherein the evidence
has been led and the matter is at the stage of arguments or
judgment, the Court should be slow to exercise the power to
quash the proceedings. However, if such an application is made
at an initial stage before commencement of trial, the said factor
will weigh with the court in exercising its power…”The case was quashed by the High Court on the ground that complainant do not want to proceed with the case
Nitish Banka is an advocate practicing in Supreme Court of India and can be reached at [email protected] or 9891549997
