False allegations under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) can have severe consequences not only for the accused but also for their families, particularly the parents. This provision was created with the intention of protecting women from cruelty and harassment in their matrimonial homes, but it has been frequently misused.

When false charges are filed, it can lead to the arrest and imprisonment of the accused, causing immense stress, financial burden, and damage to their reputation. However, the impact isn’t limited to the accused alone; parents, who are often implicated in these cases, suffer as well. They not only witness their child’s distress but also face legal battles, social stigma, and financial strain.

Now at least what you can do is to get your parents out of the False 498a cases.

What are the Legal Grounds And Process for getting parents out of the false 498a?

Vague Allegations

Vague allegations in a First Information Report (FIR) can pose significant challenges in the legal process and may undermine the fairness of the investigation and subsequent legal proceedings. An FIR is a crucial document that initiates criminal investigations, and it is expected to provide clear and specific details about the alleged offense. When the allegations in an FIR are vague, several issues may arise:

1. Lack of Clarity: Vague allegations can make it difficult for law enforcement and the courts to understand the nature of the offense, the individuals involved, and the circumstances surrounding the incident. This lack of clarity can hinder the investigation and the accused’s ability to defend themselves.
2. Misinterpretation: Vague allegations can be open to misinterpretation, leading to confusion and potential miscarriages of justice. Without specific information, it may be challenging to determine the true nature of the offense.
3. Violation of Due Process: In many legal systems, accused individuals have the right to know the precise nature of the charges against them. Vague allegations can violate this fundamental principle of due process.
4. Potential for Abuse: Vague allegations may be used to target individuals with malicious intent or to create legal hurdles for them. This can be a form of harassment or abuse of the legal system.

To address vague allegations in an FIR, it is essential for the accused and their legal representation to challenge the FIR’s validity and request that the allegations be clarified and substantiated. The legal system should ensure that investigations are thorough and fair and that the accused’s rights are protected. In cases where allegations are proven to be baseless or intentionally vague, legal consequences for the accuser may be considered to deter misuse of the FIR process.

So the first step is to find the exact role of the parents and other relatives in the FIR and if the role is Vague then it is a fit case to quash.

Live Case Sagar Gupta Vs Priyanka Gupta Jabalpur High Court

In the case I assisted before the Jabalpur High Court, the allegations against the husband were exclusively related to incidents that occurred in Bhopal, with no specific involvement of the parents mentioned in the FIR. The parents resided in Chhattisgarh and had no direct or apparent role in the events described in the complaint. Recognizing the absence of any legal basis for implicating the parents in the case, the Hon’ble High Court rightly quashed the charges against them. This decision not only upheld the principles of justice and fairness but also emphasized the importance of ensuring that legal proceedings are based on concrete evidence and specific allegations, preventing innocent parties from being unjustly dragged into litigation.

GETTING STAY ON TRIAL

It is important to get a stay on trial in 2nd or third date because if charges are framed then the quashing petition will get infructuos. Therefore Staying on trial is an important aspect and if FIR is lodged then no coercive action for the parents is an essential element to get the same

The greatest harassment for the Husband and his family starts as soon as the 498A charge sheet is filed. You can also go for quashing of charge sheet and also get a stay on trial..

Here you will save harassment while your case is being decided..

In the legal matter at the Bombay High Court, where the wife failed to appear and contest the quashing petition, the court’s decision to stay the entire proceedings is significant for the husband and his family members. This stay order essentially means that they are not required to attend the court or participate in further legal proceedings until the stay is lifted or the case is resolved.

The stay order serves several important purposes:

1. Relief from Ongoing Legal Proceedings: The husband and his family members are temporarily relieved from the burden of attending court hearings and dealing with the associated legal processes. This can be a significant relief in terms of time, stress, and expenses.
2. Opportunity for Amicable Resolution: The stay order provides an opportunity for the parties to explore alternative dispute resolution methods, such as mediation or negotiation, to reach an amicable settlement without the need for protracted court proceedings.
3. Legal Protection: It safeguards the interests of the husband and his family members by preventing any adverse judgments or legal actions from being taken in their absence during the stay period.
4. Time for Preparation: The stay order allows the parties more time to prepare their case, gather evidence, and consult with legal counsel if needed.

Overall, the stay order issued by the Bombay High Court offers the husband and his family members a temporary respite from the legal battle and an opportunity to seek a fair and just resolution to the dispute while preserving their legal rights and interests.

False 498a cases are very common in society and a lot of steps have been taken by the Hon’ble Apex Court also to prevent its misuse. Quashing of false 498a is possible but first, you need to know the reason for false 498a

These days false 498a cases gropes all the relatives father, mother sister who may be staying away from the matrimonial home still they become party to 498a.

Here are the reasons wife has filed false 498a cases on your family.

Stay on Trial order Bombay High Court

In my recent legal undertaking, I achieved a significant milestone by obtaining a stay on trial for my relatives, despite facing allegations that initially cast a shadow over their involvement. The Bombay High Court’s decision to grant the stay speaks to the merit of the arguments put forth during the proceedings. The core of my defense rested on the substantial duration of the marriage in question, spanning a decade, and the geographical separation of my sister-in-law and her husband, who had been residing in Bangalore for employment-related reasons. This geographical distance was a crucial element, emphasizing their detachment from the daily affairs of the husband and wife.

Furthermore, I emphasized that the implicated relatives were not only distant in familial ties but were also entirely uninvolved in the intricacies of the matrimonial life under scrutiny. Their roles were essentially peripheral, and they could not be reasonably connected to the alleged incidents in question. The employment-driven residence in Bangalore added another layer of justification for their absence from the immediate circumstances surrounding the case.

A compelling point was the fact that, at the time of the incident that led to the legal proceedings, the sister-in-law was situated in a completely different city. This temporal and spatial separation was underscored to demonstrate the implausibility of her direct involvement or influence over the events in question.

This legal victory highlights the importance of presenting a comprehensive and factual narrative that not only addresses the specific allegations but also elucidates the broader context, showcasing the lack of relevance and involvement of the implicated relatives in the matrimonial affairs of the husband and wife. The success in obtaining a stay on trial serves as a testament to the effectiveness of a well-reasoned and meticulously presented legal defense.

ACHIEVEMENT: STAY ON TRIAL FROM BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN 2 CASES WITHIN A WEEK

In a recent legal matter, my clients were facing undue harassment as the wife, a resident of Mumbai, filed legal cases against them in Mumbai, despite both the husband and wife being residents of Mumbai. The significant concern was that the cases involved the parents who were based in Delhi, a location where the wife had never resided.

Recognizing the injustice of the situation, I swiftly traveled to Bombay for the case. On the very first court appearance, I successfully secured a stay on the entire trial, highlighting the fundamental mismatch between the legal jurisdiction and the actual circumstances of residence. This outcome demonstrates the effectiveness of our legal strategy in promptly protecting our clients’ rights and ensuring a fair legal process.

If you are facing a similar situation or have concerns about jurisdictional issues in your case, our track record of obtaining swift and favorable outcomes can provide you with the assurance that your rights will be vigorously defended. We are committed to delivering effective legal representation tailored to your specific circumstances.

In one of my case in Bangalore. The Karnataka High Court also gave the stay order qua parents

In this legal case, the husband and wife were residing in Australia when their dispute emerged. The husband’s parents, who lived in Ghaziabad, were falsely implicated in the case. We successfully obtained a stay order regarding the trial involving the parents, highlighting that the wife had never lived with them in Ghaziabad.

The Hon’ble High Court, in its decision, referenced a relevant Supreme Court judgment. Additionally, the husband, being an Australian resident, had already legally divorced his wife according to Australian law. Subsequently, he ensured the cancellation of his wife’s dependent visa.

In response to the visa cancellation, the wife retaliated by filing false dowry cases. However, these cases were promptly stayed by the court. The overall argument centered on establishing the lack of connection between the wife and the husband’s parents in Ghaziabad, emphasizing the inaccuracy of their implication in the legal proceedings.

Getting Stay on High Court At Jalpaiguri

This time, the stay order was to be obtained from the Jalpaiguri High Court at the Calcutta bench. The case involved the false implication of the brother-in-law, sister-in-law, as well as the mother-in-law in a 498A case. They were immediately summoned by the trial court to attend the trial proceedings. The trial court was situated over 100 kilometers away, and the client urgently needed an order from the honorable High Court.

Even though it was my first time appearing before this High Court, I had to effectively manage my team to deliver results for the client. I coordinated with my team and traveled almost 3000 kilometers in a day to secure a stay for my client. I argued before the honorable judge that the parents were called before the trial court and emphasized the immediate need for a stay order. Initially, the judge was reluctant because the state had not been served any notice, but I persisted on the urgency of the matter. I even volunteered to return in 2 or 3 days to post the matter again. Thankfully, the honorable judge understood the urgency of my client’s situation and granted a stay for 4 weeks.

I am grateful to the local team for taking the initiative to list the matter at lightning speed when I was 1500 kilometers away from where the matter would be taken up.

Getting Stay on Trial for Husband

Securing a stay on a trial for a husband in matrimonial disputes is notably challenging, with such orders being rare. However, I encountered a unique case where the court granted a stay on the very first date of the trial. This case involved a marriage that lasted only 20 days, during which the wife alleged dowry harassment against the husband. The incident supposedly occurred in Bengaluru, yet the police conducted their investigation in Calcutta, without ever visiting Bengaluru.

I argued that this discrepancy highlighted a malicious intent to falsely implicate the husband in a dowry harassment case. The learned judge concurred with my argument, recognizing the lack of a proper investigation and the potential malafide intention of the wife. Consequently, the judge ordered a stay on the complete trial. This case exemplifies how demonstrating procedural lapses and potential malicious intent can lead to a stay in otherwise difficult circumstances.

When wife Side do clever drafting of FIR, This is How you get stay

In the case I argued before the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta at Jalpaiguri, my primary focus was on seeking the quashing of the FIR against the parents. I presented a detailed argument centered on the pattern and structure of the complaint filed by the wife. Upon close examination, it became evident that the allegations were framed in a highly repetitive and generalized manner, particularly against the parents. The complaint consistently used the phrase “Husband and In-laws” throughout every paragraph, with little to no specific or individualized accusations. This pattern suggested that the allegations were not only vague but also appeared to be copied and pasted, lacking any substantive basis.

I argued that this repetitive and unsubstantiated use of “Husband and In-laws” indicated that the complaint was strategically crafted to unfairly implicate the parents, without any concrete evidence or particular incidents being cited against them. The intent behind such a complaint seemed to be to harass and drag the parents into legal proceedings unnecessarily, rather than to seek justice based on genuine grievances. Therefore, I urged the court to recognize the lack of merit in the allegations against the parents and to quash the FIR, as it was a clear misuse of legal processes intended to target the family members.

Getting Stay on trial from Calcutta High Court

It is important to mention when I travel to long distances outside Delhi and specially went to Calcutta High Court and to my disappointment the matter did not came up on the first date of the hearing and later the there is a huge pendency of cases at Calcutta High Court it was not a fruitful visit for me however client has invested so much on me to or give the matter there so this time with my local team there and myself made a close watch of entire matter and multiple dates the matter was on the causes list but was not became higher on the board or this kid before the bench after 5-6 hearings although I attended all these 5-6 hearings through VC to save clients expenses and my time and finally the matter came up after the 6th hearing on 30th July 2024 I argued the matter and it was against the mother-in-law and the married sister-in-law I argued that the married sister-in-law used to stay separately and mother-in-law was not involved in any kind of dowry harassment I argued on the lines that the vague and general allegations are there in the entire FBI therefore the entire fire as well as the charge sheet requires complete quashing however but honorable judge was kind kind enough to grant me stay on the trial in this case on the very first date only because I argued that on 21st of August 2024 the mother-in-law as well as the married sister-in-law is required to appear before the try good judge the honorable High Court issued notice in this the case and granted we stay on trial

Getting a Stay From the Hon’ble Supreme Court

In the challenging situation involving the husband, his parents, and their pursuit of legal relief, the complexity and intricacies of the Indian legal system have become evident. The initial attempt to seek complete quashing in the High Court indicates their determination to resolve their legal issues efficiently. However, the High Court’s decision to reject their petition posed a significant obstacle.

Subsequently, they decided to escalate the matter to the Supreme Court, which is often considered the highest legal authority in the country. At this point, the strategy shifted, and it was advised to focus on the case involving the parents rather than the husband. This strategic shift demonstrates a calculated approach to securing the best possible outcome.

Two notable case studies, the Kotagiri case and the Fiyazuddin case, serve as illustrative examples of this strategy in action. In the Kotagiri case, the High Court’s initial rejection of the quash petition prompted the parties to turn to the Supreme Court for help. Here, they succeeded in obtaining a stay on the entire trial specifically for the parents. This achievement represents a significant victory in ensuring that the parents are shielded from any immediate legal repercussions.

In the Fiyazuddin case, the strategy of focusing on the case at the Supreme Court level yielded positive results once again. This time, they successfully had the husband removed from the case and ensured that no coercive actions would be taken against the parents and relatives. This outcome is indicative of a well-executed legal strategy that prioritizes the best interests of the parents while navigating the complexities of the Indian legal system.

These case studies highlight the importance of adaptability and strategic thinking when dealing with legal challenges in India. They also underscore the significance of seeking relief at the highest judicial level when necessary, in this case, the Supreme Court, to secure the most favorable outcomes.

Here is a brief summary of my quashing experience before various High Courts of Country…

Complete Quashing at Hon’ble Supreme Court of India Full case study with Judgement.

The complete quashing of Section 498A was done by the honorable Supreme Court of India for six members of a family. The case revolved around a husband and wife who used to reside in Saudi Arabia. There, the husband faced some adjustment issues with the wife, leading her to leave him and return to India on her own. However, no settlement was reached between the parties. The wife demanded a substantial alimony for separation, which the husband found unaffordable. She demanded crores of rupees, which he couldn’t meet. In response, she implicated not only the husband’s parents but also his three married sisters-in-law. These sisters-in-law had never resided with the husband, and their marriages had taken place ten years prior to the husband’s.

Arguments Advanced

In this case, the arguments focused on the roles of the family members mentioned in the charge sheet and FIR, as well as the quality of the police investigation. I highlighted that the police had done a shoddy job, merely replicating the contents of the complaint in the charge sheet without conducting thorough investigations. Specifically, I pointed out that they failed to visit the place where the sister-in-law was implicated or to investigate specific incidents.

On the prosecution side, they argued that there was a lack of cooperation with the investigation. However, I countered this by pointing out the contradiction: if the police had conducted a proper investigation as they claimed, then it was illogical to accuse my client of non-cooperation. The Supreme Court acknowledged this contradiction and questioned what further cooperation was necessary, especially considering the vague and general nature of the allegations.

I emphasized that the allegations lacked specificity, with no mention of specific dates, times, or places where the accused family members supposedly committed the offenses. Since these relatives had never resided together, the allegations were deemed vague and general. Agreeing with my arguments, the honorable Supreme Court quashed the entire legal proceedings based on these vague and general allegations.

Expeditious disposal instead of quashing off entire charge sheet and a fir a similar case I was arguing before unable Supreme Court of India in which hi was representing a boy who is who was just 2627 years old and was implicated in false 498 eight cases is it dark earlier was getting affected by due to the pendency of the cases since 2015 nine years have elapsed and his selection to various good company was getting affected by the false 498a cases the High Court rejected the quashing petition of the boy and we went to the Supreme Court for the similar relief the animal Supreme Court ordered notice as well as stay of entire proceedings but I argued that his age will relapse if the trial is not completed within a reasonable time we got an order which was suitable for this type of case where the time was critical and his age factor would lapse if there is a delay in quashing as well as in on trial so the honorable Supreme Court directed the trial court to finish the case within six months.

It sounds like you had a significant case where the Supreme Court of India recognized the critical impact of prolonged legal proceedings on a young individual’s career and life prospects. The court’s directive to expedite the trial within six months demonstrates an understanding of the necessity for timely justice, especially in cases where a lengthy trial process can cause undue harm to the accused.

This example highlights an important aspect of the legal system: balancing the need for thorough judicial proceedings with the rights and lives of individuals who may be unjustly affected by prolonged cases. The move towards expeditious disposal, rather than outright quashing of charge sheets and FIRs, aims to ensure that justice is served without unnecessary delays, thereby protecting the rights of the accused while maintaining the integrity of the judicial process.

The introduction of the new BNS laws, with their focus on streamlined processes and timely justice, could further support such outcomes. By ensuring that cases, especially those involving young individuals with critical career timelines, are resolved swiftly, the legal system can better serve justice and protect the future prospects of those wrongfully accused.

If you need more details or wish to discuss how the new BNS laws might impact similar cases in the future, feel free to ask.

Expeditious disposal instead of quashing off entire charge sheet and a fir a similar case I was arguing before unable Supreme Court of India in which hi was representing a boy who is who was just 2627 years old and was implicated in false 498 eight cases is it dark earlier was getting affected by due to the pendency of the cases since 2015 nine years have elapsed and his selection to various good company was getting affected by the false 498a cases the High Court rejected the quashing petition of the boy and we went to the Supreme Court for the similar relief the animal Supreme Court ordered notice as well as stay of entire proceedings but I argued that his age will relapse if the trial is not completed within a reasonable time we got an order which was suitable for this type of case where the time was critical and his age factor would lapse if there is a delay in quashing as well as in on trial so the honorable Supreme Court directed the trial court to finish the case within six months.

Expeditious disposal instead of quashing the entire charge sheet and FIR:

I was arguing a case before the Honorable Supreme Court of India in which I was representing a young man, aged 26-27, who had been falsely implicated in a 498A case. The case, pending since 2015, had severely affected his career prospects as his selection to various reputable companies was hindered by the ongoing legal proceedings.

The High Court had rejected his petition for quashing the charge sheet, so we approached the Supreme Court seeking similar relief. The Honorable Supreme Court issued a notice and stayed the entire proceedings. I argued that the prolonged trial was critical as it could negatively impact his age-sensitive career opportunities.

Understanding the urgency, the Supreme Court issued an order directing the trial court to complete the case within six months. This decision was crucial, given the significant time elapsed and the impact on his future prospects.

ashing an FIR at the very initial stage, or to wait until the charge sheet is filed. From my experience with matrimonial disputes, particularly in cases under Section 498A IPC or Sections 85/86 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha (BNS), I have often observed stays being granted on trial after the charge sheet is submitted. However, there are certain scenarios where it’s advisable to seek relief at the FIR stage itself, rather than waiting for the charge sheet to be filed.

Why is this important? Because going for quashing early can prevent police harassment during the investigation process, the potential threat of arrest, and the need to go through the burdensome process of applying for anticipatory bail. If the allegations in the FIR are vague, or if innocent family members like distant relatives have been wrongly implicated, quashing the FIR at an early stage becomes crucial. It saves time, stress, and legal expenses down the road.

Let me share a recent case I handled before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, where I approached the court directly at the FIR stage, before any charge sheet had been filed. In this case, the party had first moved to the High Court for quashing the FIR, but the petition was dismissed. The High Court, instead of going into the merits of the case, passed a standard order relying on the *Arnesh Kumar* judgment, essentially directing the petitioner to wait for the charge sheet or follow the procedure laid down in *Arnesh Kumar* regarding arrests in matrimonial cases.

This is a common risk when you approach the High Court at the FIR stage—the court may not entertain the petition and may pass generic orders without delving into the specifics of your case. However, it is the duty of counsel to present the real crux of the matter, highlighting the frivolity or vagueness of the allegations so that interim relief can be obtained even at the FIR stage. If the facts are clearly in your favor and the accusations are unfounded, a well-prepared representation can lead to a stay on the investigation.

In the case I mentioned, the High Court initially dismissed the quashing petition, but after we moved to the Supreme Court, we successfully obtained interim directions to stay the investigation. The Supreme Court recognized the inherent unfairness of subjecting the petitioner to police scrutiny based on vague and generalized allegations.

So, whether to file for quashing at the FIR stage or after the charge sheet is filed largely depends on the facts and circumstances of the case. If the allegations are weak, and especially if multiple family members are being dragged into the case unjustly, an early intervention at the FIR stage is advisable. This ensures that you avoid unnecessary harassment and legal battles later on.

**My Experience at the Supreme Court: Securing a Stay on FIR and Investigation Proceedings**

Can you go for quashing at FIR stage and How to Obtain a Stay on Investigation When an FIR is Pending in 498A or Under Sections 85/86 of the BNS? My Supreme Court Experience

n a case that highlights the complexities of matrimonial disputes and the far-reaching impact of Section 498A, I recently had the opportunity to argue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and secure a crucial stay on the FIR, investigation, and subsequent proceedings. The journey to the apex court was marked by legal challenges and strategic decisions, especially given the peculiar facts of the case.

The case involved a family embroiled in a property dispute, and the resulting FIR under Section 498A was not filed until 2024—29 years after the marriage, which had taken place in 1995. The complainant, in a clear attempt to exert pressure, implicated not only the husband but also his brother, the brother’s wife, and their children. The accusations were vague, general, and devoid of specific details. Yet, as many legal practitioners are aware, in India, the threat of a 498A FIR looms large over matrimonial relationships, no matter how long the marriage has lasted. This case was a testament to that reality.

### The High Court’s Rejection

When the matter was initially brought before the Telangana High Court, we sought to quash the FIR on the grounds of the absurdity of filing such allegations after nearly three decades of marriage. However, the High Court did not delve into the merits of our case. Instead, it relied on the procedural requirements laid out in the landmark *Arnesh Kumar* judgment, directing the Investigating Officer (IO) to issue a Section 41A notice and proceed with the investigation. The court was of the opinion that since the investigation was still in progress, the matter could not be quashed at that stage. This left us in a difficult position, especially as the allegations were clearly designed to harass the husband’s relatives, who had nothing to do with the alleged matrimonial cruelty.

### The Move to the Supreme Court

Undeterred by the setback at the High Court, we decided to escalate the matter to the Hon’ble Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition (SLP). The primary points we raised were as follows:

1. **The Duration of the Marriage**: We emphasized that the marriage was 29 years old and questioned how a wife could suddenly file an FIR under Section 498A after nearly three decades, especially when the relatives of the husband were being dragged into the case without any specific allegations.

2. **Vague and General Allegations**: The accusations against the husband’s relatives were nothing more than a stray mention that they “supported the husband in his acts of cruelty.” There were no concrete incidents or facts to substantiate these claims. The allegations were clearly made in bad faith, as part of a wider strategy to exert pressure on the family due to the underlying property dispute.

### The Supreme Court Hearing

At the Supreme Court, we presented these arguments, focusing heavily on the long-standing marriage and the baseless nature of the allegations. The Hon’ble Court was immediately struck by the absurdity of the situation—29 years of marriage, followed by a sudden 498A complaint against distant relatives with no direct involvement. This fact alone raised serious doubts about the legitimacy of the FIR.

During the hearing, I pressed for an interim stay on the investigation and the filing of the charge sheet. I highlighted that if the police were allowed to proceed with the charge sheet, it would complicate matters further. Once the charge sheet is filed, the case would progress to trial, and it would become increasingly difficult to address the meritless nature of the FIR in an effective manner.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court took note of this argument. After careful consideration, the Court granted a stay on both the investigation and the filing of the charge sheet. This was a significant relief, not only because it paused the entire legal process, but also because it provided the much-needed breathing room to ensure that justice is done.

### The Outcome: A Victory on the First Date

Remarkably, the Supreme Court granted this stay on the very first date of hearing, without even issuing formal notice to the respondents at that stage. This immediate relief speaks to the strength of our arguments and the Court’s recognition of the injustice being meted out to the husband’s relatives.

### Reflections on the Case

This case highlights an important issue in matrimonial disputes—the misuse of Section 498A to target not just husbands, but entire families, often as a tool of harassment. The fact that an FIR can be filed after 29 years of marriage underscores the vulnerability of individuals accused under this section. While the law was originally intended to protect women from cruelty, its misuse in cases like this can cause immense hardship to innocent family members.

The Supreme Court’s decision to stay the investigation and other proceedings provides hope that justice will ultimately prevail. This case also serves as a reminder of the importance of strategic legal thinking—by focusing on the relatives rather than the husband initially, we were able to carve a path to victory, even after the High Court had refused to quash the FIR.

The legal battle is far from over, but this initial success at the Supreme Court has set the tone for the proceedings to come. The focus now shifts to securing a final resolution that will ensure that baseless and harassing allegations do not continue to cloud the lives of those who have been wrongfully accused.

Supreme court Judgements Must use in Quashing for relatives

n 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 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 relatives 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 Ravinder Kumar and Ors. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. (03.01.2020 – HPHC) Present petition seeks quashing of FIR registered against petitioner for offences under Sections 498A, 354, 406 and 34 of IPC. The question is whether FIR impugned herein need to be quashed or not? Held, 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. FIR qua present petitioner quashed and set aside.

In case of Nitin Garg vs. State of U.P. and Ors. (06.01.2022 – ALLHC),  petiiton is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR filed under Sections 498A, 323 and 506 of IPC and Quashing of charge-sheet and stay of the criminal proceedings. Marriage of the victim solemnised with the applicant on 3.12.2003. Her allegation that accused persons attempted to commit rape upon her. Her husband tried to strangulate her on two occasions. Parties settled their matrimonial dispute before the Supreme Court Mediation Centre on 16.11.2018. Parties have mutually settled of their own free will and a decree under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act has been passed by the Principal Family Court. In view of the settlement and keeping the position of law in this regard cognizance order dated 7.11.2017 has been taken and FIR is quashedand petition for quashing is allowed by the court.

In case of Gaurav Vij and Ors. vs. State of NCT of Delhi and Ors. (07.09.2021 – DELHC) present petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), for quashing of charges under Sections 498A, 306, 201 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). The question is whether present petition needs interference. Delhi High Court held that, allegation levelled in suicide note are vague. Petitioners at no time instigated, provoked deceased to commit suicide. Suicide note not capable of being viewed as material for offence. Section 107 IPC not satisfied therefore, no case made in section 306 IPC. Hence, FIR quashed in this matter and Petition is allowed.

In case of Jaimeet Singh Kalra and Ors. vs. State and Ors. (02.06.2022 – DELHC), Criminal – petition is filed for Quashing of FIR under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). Alleged offences punishable under sections 498A/406/376/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). Parties living separately due to matrimonial differences and there Disputes settled by way of settlement. Whether in exercise of inherent powers subject FIR also pertaining for non-compoundable offences could be quashed? Court held that, extraordinary power to be exercised sparingly and with great care and caution. Power of compounding and quashing of criminal proceedings in exercise of inherent powers not equal or inter-changeable in law. Parties settled their disputes vide settlement and agreed to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent and also endingtheir pending litigation. Lodging of FIR was outcome of matrimonial discord. In given facts and circumstances, there is remote and bleak possibility of conviction. Petition accordingly allowed and subject FIR quashed.

Adv. Nitish Banka

9891549997