Courts must rigorously scrutinize criminal complaints arising from matrimonial disputes for veracity. Proceedings based on vague, omnibus, and unsubstantiated allegations, particularly those indicative of personal vendetta, should be quashed to prevent abuse of the judicial process and protect innocent parties from unnecessary legal harassment.

JUDGMENT

NAGARATHNA, J.

Leave granted.

2. The present criminal appeal has been preferred by the accused/appellants aggrieved by the impugned order dated 15.09.2025 passed by the High Court of Allahabad in Application U/S 528 BNSS No.34442 of 2025 wherein the High Court refused to quash the criminal proceedings against them, arising out of Complaint Case No.05 of 2025 pending adjudication before the Court of Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as “trial court”). The said complaint was lodged by respondent No.2 (hereinafter referred to as “the complainant”) under Sections 65 , 74, 352, 351(2), 115 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS”) and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as “POCSO Act”).

Factual Background:

3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that accused/appellant No.1 is the husband of the complainant whereas the accused/appellant No.2 is the mother-in-law of the complainant. The accused/appellant No.3 and accused/appellant No.4 are sister-in-law and brother-in-law of the complainant respectively. The said accused/appellants hereinafter are collectively referred to as “the appellants”. Appellant No.1 and his brother, one late Praveen got married to the complainant and her younger sister respectively in the year 2008 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. A daughter, the prosecutrix, was born on 08.06.2009 out of the wedlock between appellant No.1 and the complainant, followed by a son thereafter.

3.1 Owing to matrimonial discord between the parties, in the year 2011, the complainant and her sister left the matrimonial home whereupon the care and custody of the two children of appellant No.1 and the complainant continued to be undertaken by the appellants. Following their separation, the parties were embroiled in multiple criminal and civil proceedings against each other. The allegations and claims contained in the said cases are not germane for the adjudication of the present case. Suffice it to say that the complainant had filed FIR No.93 of 2011 under Sections 498-A, 323, 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, “IPC”) read with Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in which appellants have been granted bail. A Complaint Case No.443 of 2013 had also been filed under Sections 12, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Furthermore, Case No.134 of 2024 under Sections 326, 327, 323, 504, 506 and 354 IPC was filed by the complainant in which the appellants have obtained bail. On the other hand, appellant No.1 has filed a petition for divorce under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 being Case No.1325 of 2022. Furthermore, FIR No.105 of 2016, under Sections 307, 452, 323, 326 and 504 IPC, FIR No.238 of 2018 under Sections 302, 328 and 329 IPC and FIR No.228 of 2024 under Sections 75 , 352, 115(2), 351(2) and 351(3) BNS were filed against the complainant and her family. The list of said cases filed by the parties against each other have been placed in a tabular format below: