Implicating Relatives In Domestic Violence Cases Without Specific Allegations & Proceeding Without Prima Facie Evidence Amounts To Abuse Of Law: SC

The Supreme Court observed that in domestic violence cases, implicating relatives without specific allegations and proceeding against them without prima facie evidence, amounts to abuse of the process of law.

The Court observed thus in Criminal Appeals preferred against the Judgment of the Telangana High Court by which it refused to quash the criminal proceedings against the accused persons.

The two-Judge Bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh remarked, “There may be situations where some of the family members or relatives may turn a blind eye to the violence or harassment perpetrated to the victim, and may not extend any helping hand to the victim, which does not necessarily mean that they are also perpetrators of domestic violence, unless the circumstances clearly indicate their involvement and instigation. Hence, implicating all such relatives without making specific allegations and attributing offending acts to them and proceeding against them without prima facie evidence that they were complicit and had actively collaborated with the perpetrators of domestic violence, would amount to abuse of the process of law.”

The Bench also emphasised that in criminal cases relating to domestic violence, the complaints and charges should be specific, as far as possible, as against each and every member of the family who are accused of such offences and sought to be prosecuted, as otherwise, it may amount to misuse of the stringent criminal process by indiscriminately dragging all the members of the family.

AORs Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru and Irshad Ahmad represented the Appellants while AORs Devina Sehgal and Parijat Kishore represented the Respondents.

Brief Facts

A written Complaint was filed before the Mahila Police Station in 2021 by a woman (Complainant) in which it was mentioned that she was married in 2016 and at the time of marriage, her mother-in-law allegedly demanded Rs. 30 lakhs. The Complainant’s mother had given Rs. 10 Lakhs by way of cash and 15 tolas of gold as dowry to her mother-in-law and for about five months after the marriage, the Complainant’s husband had treated her well and took care of her properly. Later, allegedly, her husband started suspecting her character and started harassing her mentally and physically to get additional dowry of Rs. 10 lakhs for which her mother-in-law, the younger sister of her mother-in-law, the Appellant, her brother-in-law, and the Appellant’s son pressurized her to act according to her husband’s and mother-in-law’s wishes. It was alleged that they also threatened to kill her if the demand of dowry was not met.

It was further alleged that because of their behaviour, the Complainant’s mother organised Panchayat several times before the elders and other family members and in front of them, her husband agreed to take care of her properly but after sometime he again started harassing her. Ultimately, the Complainant approached the Police for counselling but there was no allegedly no change in the accused’s behaviour. Resultantly, she filed a Complaint and then an FIR was registered under Sections 498A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (DP Act). Apart from this, another Complaint was filed alleging cruelty and criminal intimidation under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act). As the High Court declined to quash the criminal proceedings pending before the Additional Judicial Magistrate, the Appellants approached the Apex Court.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court in view of the above facts, noted, “Criminalising domestic disputes without specific allegations and credible materials to support the same may have disastrous consequences for the institution of family, which is built on the premise of love, affection, cordiality and mutual trust. Institution of family constitutes the core of human society. Domestic relationships, such as those between family members, are guided by deeply ingrained social values and cultural expectations. These relationships are often viewed as sacred, demanding a higher level of respect, commitment, and emotional investment compared to other social or professional associations. For the aforesaid reason, preservation of family relationship has always been emphasised upon.”

The Court added that, when family relationships are sought to be brought within the ambit of criminal proceedings rupturing the family bond, Courts should be circumspect and judicious, and should allow invocation of criminal process only when there are specific allegations with supporting materials which clearly constitute criminal offences.

“We have to keep in mind that in the context of matrimonial disputes, emotions run high, and as such in the complaints filed alleging harassment or domestic violence, there may be a tendency to implicate other members of the family who do not come to the rescue of the complainant or remain mute spectators to any alleged incident of harassment, which in our view cannot by itself constitute a criminal act without there being specific acts attributed to them. Further, when tempers run high and relationships turn bitter, there is also a propensity to exaggerate the allegations, which does not necessarily mean that such domestic disputes should be given the colour of criminality”, it further said.

The Court was of the opinion that, genuine cases of cruelty and violence in domestic sphere, which do happen, ought to be handled with utmost sensitivity as domestic violence typically happens within the four walls of the house and not in the public gaze.

“Since, violence perpetrated within the domestic sphere by close relatives is now criminalised entailing serious consequences on the perpetrators, the courts have to be careful while dealing with such cases by examining whether there are specific allegations with instances against the perpetrators and not generalised allegations”, it added.

The Court observed that, for a matrimonial relationship which is founded on the basis of cordiality and trust to turn sour to an extent to make a partner to hurl allegations of domestic violence and harassment against the other partner, would normally not happen at the spur of the moment and such acrimonious relationship would develop only in course of time.

“Thus, in such cases involving allegations of domestic violence or harassment, there would normally be a series of offending acts, which would be required to be spelt out by the complainant against the perpetrators in specific terms to rope such perpetrators in the criminal proceedings sought to be initiated against them. Thus, mere general allegation of harassment without pointing out the specifics against such perpetrators would not suffice, as is the case in respect of the present appellants”, it also said.

However, the Court clarified that its observations should not be generalised to mean that relatives cannot be brought under the purview of the penal provisions when they have actively participated in inflicting cruelty on the daughter-in-law/victim.

“What needs to be assessed is whether such allegations are genuine with specific criminal role assigned to such members of the family or whether it is merely a spill over and side-effect of a matrimonial discord and allegations made by an emotionally disturbed person. Each and every case of domestic violence will thus depend on the peculiar facts obtaining in each case”, it concluded.

Accordingly, the Apex Court allowed the Criminal Appeals and quashed the proceedings against the accused persons.

Cause Title- Geddam Jhansi & Anr. v. The State of Telangana & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 160)

Appearance:

Appellants: AORs Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru, Irshad Ahmad, Advocates Nitin Tambwekar, Sanjeev Kumar Choudhary, Indrajeet Singh, Shaik Mohmmad Haneef, Suneet Singh, and Vijay Kumar.

Respondents: AORs Devina Sehgal, Parijat Kishore, Advocates Vineet George, and Beno Bencigar.

Click here to read/download the Judgment