The Supreme Court has quashed criminal proceedings against the father-in-law and mother-in-law of a complainant in a dowry harassment case, holding that general and omnibus allegations without specific roles cannot justify continuation of criminal prosecution.
The Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta set aside the Patna High Court’s order, which had refused to quash proceedings against the appellants while granting relief to the complainant’s sister-in-law.
The case arose from an FIR registered in 2022 under Sections 341, 323, 498A and 34 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, where the complainant alleged cruelty and dowry demands, including a demand for a BMW car. The Patna High Court had quashed the proceedings only against the sister-in-law, observing that the allegations against her were general in nature, but allowed the prosecution to continue against the in-laws.
Setting aside that distinction, the Supreme Court held that the same reasoning applied equally to the in-laws.
“A comparative reading of the FIR reveals that the allegations levelled against the sister-in-law and those against the present appellants are, in all material particulars, identical. The FIR does not assign any specific or overt act to either appellant; there are no particular dates, places, or individual acts attributed to them.”
The Bench further held that a mere allegation that the in-laws would quarrel cannot by itself constitute an offence under the provisions invoked.
“The lone allegation that they would quarrel does not constitute a criminal offence and cannot sustain cognisance under Sections 341, 323, 498A & 34 IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Act.”
The Court also observed that the criminal complaint was filed nearly a year after the husband had initiated divorce proceedings, which supported the argument that the case against the in-laws may have been a counter-blast to the matrimonial dispute.
Consequently, the Court held that the High Court erred in applying different standards to similarly placed accused persons and quashed the criminal proceedings against the appellants.
However, the Court clarified that the proceedings against the husband would continue in accordance with law, as he had not sought quashing before the High Court or the Supreme Court.
Appearances
Petitioners- Mr. Rohit Kumar Singh, AOR Mr. Lal Babu Singh, Adv. Mr. Rana Prashant, Adv. Mr. Akash Kumar, Adv. Mr. Mahender Rathour, Adv.
Respondents- Mr. Bharat Sangal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Hemant Kumar Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Nagarkatti Kartik Uday, AOR Mr. Anshul Narayan, Addl. Standing Counsel, Adv. Mrs. Vineeta Singh, Adv. Mr. Anshuman Harsh, Adv. Mr. Prem Prakash, AOR
