Filed With Vengeance: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes FIR U/s. 498A Against Mother & Sister In-Law

The Punjab & Haryana High Court while quashing an FIR registered under Sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code has held that it was filed with vengeance and led to the gross misuse of law.

The Court was considering a Petition seeking quashing of an FIR registered against husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law and sisters-in-law of the complainant’s daughter.

The Bench of Justice Amarjot Bhatti observed, "....On the basis of frivolous and bald allegations, present FIR has been registered against them. In-fact, registration of aforesaid FIR is result of vengeance, as the daughter of respondent No.2 Neha Chalana had matrimonial dispute with her husband and for this reason, respondent No.2 Ravinder Singh filed present complaint against Rahul Shukla and his family members who were residing in India. In light of this, registration of FIR No.47 dated 23.04.2022 under Sections 406 and 498-A of IPC, Police Station Women, Sector-17, Chandigarh (Annexure P-1), presentation of challan under Section 173 Cr.P.C. (Annexure P-5) and consequent proceedings thereon is gross misuse of the process of law and accordingly the same qua petitioner Nos.2 to 4 are quashed."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Suvir Sidhu, while the Respondent was represented by Advocate Amjad Khan.

Facts of the Case

The complainant filed the complaint against husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, and sisters-in-law of complainant’s daughter and stated that the Marriage of his daughter was settled through a matrimonial website. The Accused proposed to his daughter for marriage and the complainant and his family went to Faridabad Haryana to meet his parents. The marriage ceremony took place in Chandigarh and the complainant made all arrangements for the stay of accused's family. They were given gold ornaments as per their demand as detailed in the FIR. After marriage, during their honeymoon, the accused started checking his daughter’s mobile without her consent and found photographs of her with past relation. Later, they developed disagreements regarding their long distance relationship when they migrated to foreign countries where they were working. However, they started living together at the Accused's place.

Complainant alleged that the Accused was raising issue about past relationship of his daughter with her ex-boyfriend time and again and she was treated with cruelty as the accused and her parents wanted to get more dowry from the complainant and his daughter. His daughter suffered on account of beating and inhuman treatment given to her by her husband. She was 3-4 weeks pregnant. Finally, the wife decided to leave the company of her husband and lodged domestic violence complaint.

Counsel for the Husband denied all allegations levelled against them as false and without any basis

Reasoning By Court

The Court noted that no matrimonial dispute took place between the couple during their stay in India, and both the husband and wife have already divorced and moved ahead.

"There is nothing on record to show that Nidhi Shukla, Rachna Shukla or Asha Rani petitioner Nos.2 to 4 ever visited matrimonial home of Rahul Shukla and Neha Chalana. Therefore, there is no question of any interference on their part in the matrimonial life of the couple", the Court observed.

It, however, didn't quash the FIR against the husband on the grounds that he misused the concession of anticipatory bail granted in his favour.

The Petition was accordingly allowed.

Cause Title: Rahul Shukla And Ors. vs. UT Chandigarh and Anr. (2025:PHHC:107421)

Appearances:

Petitioner- Advocate Suvir Sidhu, Public Prosecutor Manish Bansal, Advocate Navjit Singh

Respondent- Advocate Amjad Khan, Advocate Anureet S. Sidhu

Click here to read/ download Order