Section 498A IPC Often Misused Unnecessarily Roping In Family Members Of Husband: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court observed that provisions of Section 498A of IPC are quite often misused unnecessarily roping in all the family members of the husband, who are staying elsewhere than the place of stay of the couple.
The Court was hearing a Criminal Petition seeking to quash the FIR and the chargesheet registered against accused for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 498A, 504 r/w Section 34 of IPC.
The complainant who is the wife of the accused filed a complaint alleging that two years after marriage the relationship was cordial and they did not get any child during that period and therefore, the mother-in-law, another accused and others had started mental and physical harassment to her. It was further alleged that the husband and his family members had demanded gold and other goods at the time of baby showers of the complainant. The complaint narrates several incidents like the complainant was made to stay in the room and accused used to state that the accused would marry another lady and that the complainant would be killed by using rat poison.
A case was registered and after investigation, a charge sheet was filed against all the accused persons.
The Court relied on the decision in Kahkashan kausar @ Sonam and others Vs. State of Bihar and other where Supreme Court observed, “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.”
The Court noted that in the present case only husband and mother in law were staying with the complainant and the relatives who were accused were not staying with them.
According to the Court, such involvement of relatives as accused was only in the form of omnibus allegations against them and specific details of their harassment was not narrated. The Court stated that the gist of the allegations made in the complaint with specific details was only available as against husband and mother in law, who were accused in complaint.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the Petition partially as it quashed FIR and proceedings against all the accused except husband and mother In law.
Cause Title: X v. State of Karnataka (Neutral Citation: 2024:KHC-K:2651)
Appearance:
Appellant: Adv. Kadloor Satyanarayanacharya
Respondent: HCGP Anita M. Reddy, Adv. K.S. Ganesh
