Here, are the 5 latest judgements of courts in which FIR registered under 498A got quashed due to presence of vague allegations and false charges against the husband and his family members.
In case of Kahkashan Kausar and Ors. vs. State of Bihar and Ors. (08.02.2022 – SC) wife has instituted a criminal complaint against her husband and his relatives alleging demand for dowry and harassment. Court took cognizance for the offense under Section 498A, 323 Indian Penal Code against the husband and issued summons. This dispute was eventually resolved and subsequently, a 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 re;atives sought quashing of FIR which was dismissed vide impugned judgment by the High Court. Hence, the present appeal in Supreme Court of India.
Held, while allowing the Appeal SC stated that-
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.
Upon a perusal of the contents of the FIR, it is revealed that general allegations are leveled against the relatives.
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.
In view of the above facts and discussions, the impugned order is set aside and FIR quashed in this matter.
In case of Kamlesh Kalra and Ors. vs. Shilpika Kalra and Ors. (24.04.2020 – SC) court are of the opinion that the allegations of the complainant wife with regard to non-return of the Stridhan articles and the charges Under Section 406 against the husband and his relatives are not sustainable in law. It clearly appears that the filing of the criminal complaint is a pressure tactic, having been employed by the complainant wife against her husband, mother-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law, which is clearly an abuse of the process of Court, and is liable to be quashed in toto.
In case of Ravinder Kumar and Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. (03.01.2020 – HPHC) petition seeks quashing of FIR registered against petitioner for offences under Sections 498A, 354, 406 and 34 of IPC – Whether FIR impugned herein need to be quashed. It was held that inherent power with High Court to quash criminal proceedings and FIR. Quashing allowed even in cases which are not compoundable. Power to quash to be exercised with great caution and sparingly. If allegations made are absurd, quashing justified. Where criminal proceeding manifestly attended with mala fide it must be set aside. In present case, no iota of averments or allegations to attract offences as alleged. Continuation of proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law and FIR qua present petitioner quashed and set aside.
In case of Anupam Mahajan and Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. (02.01.2020 – HPHC) petition seeks quashing of FIR registered against petitioner for offences under Sections 498A, 354, 406 and 34 of IPC and this case as well FIR is quashed and set aside as If allegations made are absurd then quashing is justified Where criminal proceeding manifestly attended with mala fide it must be set aside. In present case, no iota of averments or allegations to attract offences as alleged and Continuation of proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law.
In case of RUBI & ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. & ANR. On 16 March 2007 court established a opinion that summoning of younger members of family, unjustified. At stage of summoning it is not law that even younger members of family be also summoned to stand trial along with elders even though no specific allegation made against them and their complicity in crime prima facie mala fide and purposive-Levelling general allegations against all family members including unmarried younger girls and boys without specification is practice to be curbed because it will amount to great injustice to ask unmarried younger daughters and brothers to stand trial only because of their relationship with husband.