SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(SC) 233

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
T.S. THAKUR, ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, JJ.
TARAMANI PARAKH – APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF M.P. & ORS. – RESPONDENTS
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.456 OF 2015 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) NO.6437 OF 2013
Decided on: 16-03-2015

IMPORTANT POINT
Question of harassment and cruelty are matters to be decided in trial.
Proceedings can be quashed only if the allegations are absurd or do not made out any case or if it can be held that there is abuse of process of law, but if there is a triable case the Court does not go into reliability or otherwise of the version or the counter version.

Headnote:Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – Allegation of wife against her husband and parents-in-law of harassment – Forcing her to leave matrimonial house – Question of harassment and cruelty – Matter of trial – Triable case made out – Quashing u/s 482 – Not permissible. (Para 15)

       (2012) 8 SCC 460; Crl. Appeal No.2055 of 2014 – Relied upon

       (2009) 10 SCC 184; (2010) 10 SCC 673; (2012) 10 SCC 741 – Distinguished

       Facts of the case:

       The appellant was married to Respondent No.2 on 18th November, 2009. She lodged complaint dated 19th May, 2011 alleging that Respondent No.2 and his parents harassed her with demand of dowry amounting to cruelty.

       Charge sheet was filed against Respondent No.2 and his parents.

       The respondents accused moved the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the proceedings by submitting that the behaviour of the appellant was not cordial and in spite of efforts of the accused, she failed to improve her behaviour and her father took her with him on 22nd May, 2010. The husband filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. In mediation proceedings, the appellant stated that she did not want to live with her husband. Thereupon, the respondent filed a divorce petition on 26th April, 2011 which was pending. It was thereafter that the appellant filed the impugned complaint dated 19th May, 2011 which contained false allegations.

       The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings.

       Finding of the Court:

       Impugned judgment is not sustainable.

       Result: Appeal allowed.

Judgment

Adarsh Kumar Goel, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal has been preferred against judgment and order dated 20th February, 2013 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior in Misc. Criminal Case No.9759 of 2012.

3. The appellant was married to Respondent No.2 on 18th November, 2009. She lodged complaint dated 19th May, 2011 alleging that Respondent No.2 and his parents harassed her with demand of dowry amounting to cruelty. This led to registration of FIR being Crime No.15811 under Sections 498-A/34 of IPC at Police Station Hujrat Kotwali, Gwalior. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against Respondent No.2 and his parents which has been registered as Criminal Case No.163/12 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior.

4. The respondents accused moved the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the proceedings by submitting that the behaviour of the appellant was not cordial and in spite of efforts of the accused, she failed to improve her behaviour and her father took her with him on 22nd May, 2010. The husband filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. In mediation proceedings, the appellant stated that she did not want to live with her husband. Thereupon, the respondent filed a divorce petition on 26th April, 2011 which was pending. It was thereafter that the appellant filed the impugned complaint dated 19th May, 2011 which contained false allegations.

5. The petition was contested by the appellant.

6. The High Court relying upon judgments of this Court in Neelu Chopra and another vs. Bharti, (2009) 10 SCC 184 Manoj Mahavir Prasad Khaitan vs. Ram Gopal Moddar and another, (2010) 10 SCC 673 and Geeta Mehrotra and another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, (2012) 10 SCC 741 held that since there were no specific allegations, the criminal proceedings against the accused amounted to abuse of the court’s process. Accordingly, the High Court quashed the criminal proceedings.

7. Aggrieved by the above, the appellant has approached this Court.

8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that it was the conduct of the accused on account of their not being satisfied with the dowry given and the inability of the appellant’s family to meet such demands that the appellant was forced to leave the matrimonial home. The appellant was keen to continue in the matrimonial home and to return home even after being forced to leave but the accused refused to take her back. The husband has filed a divorce petition which is without any legal basis. The appellant lodged the complaint after filing of the divorce petition for the reason that the appellant had earlier remained hopeful that the matter may be amicably settled. It was only after she lost all hopes that she had to initiate criminal proceedings in respect of cruelty meted out to her. The High Court in proceedings under Section 482 could not quash the proceedings merely with the observation that the allegations were omnibus. The power of quashing could be exercised sparingly and only if no case was made out from the allegations taken as correct or where the complaint was absurd or legally not maintainable. In the FIR, the appellant has specifically mentioned that the accused harassed her for dowry by taunting her and beating her. It was already mentioned that she was deprived of her belongings by the accused.

10. Learned counsel for the accused respondents supported the impugned order passed by the High Court.

11. Law relating to quashing is well settled. If the allegations are absurd or do not made out any case or if it can be held that there is abuse of process of law, the proceedings can be quashed but if there is a triable case the Court does not go into reliability or otherwise of the version or the counter version. In matrimonial cases, the Courts have to be cautious when omnibus allegations are made particularly again




























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top