IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. Nagaprasanna, J.
Mr. Mohamed Shahid, S/O Mohamed Yousuff Sait And Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
State Of Karnataka By Basavanagudi Women Police Station And Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Petition No.9653 Of 2023 C/W Writ Petition No.19687 Of 2023 (Gm-Res) Writ Petition No.23864 Of 2023 (GM-RES)
Decided On : 19-07-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. interlinked criminal petitions involving family disputes. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. overview of incidents leading to complaints. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments against charges under section 498a ipc. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. court's analysis on applicability of legal provisions. (Para 8 , 9 , 14) |
| 5. concern over misuse of section 498a ipc. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 6. conclusion affirming the quashing of certain charges. (Para 16) |
| 7. legal reasoning against persecution based on non-specific allegations. (Para 18 , 21) |
ORDER :
M. Nagaprasanna, J.
Protagonists in these cases are wife, husband, mother-in-law and a friend of the wife. Criminal Petition No.9653 of 2023 is preferred by the husband and mother-in-law of the wife who are accused Nos. 1 and 2 calling in question the proceedings initiated in C.C.No.11622 of 2023 pending before the 37th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore arising out of crime in Crime No.22 of 2023 registered for offences punishable under Sections 4 98A, 323 and 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (‘the 1961 Act’ for short). Writ Petition No.19687 of 2023 and Writ Petition No. 23864 of 2023 are preferred by the wife who is accused No.1 and accused No.2 who is said to be known to the wife calling in question crime in Crime No.251 of 2023 registered pursuant to the private complaint filed by the husband in PCR No.51647 of 2023 pending before the 29th Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru for offences punishable under Sections 3 80, 411, 506, 307, 511 and 34 of the IPC and Section 3 of the Karnataka Prevention and Eradication of Inhuman Evil Practices and Black Magic Act , 2017 (‘the Act’ for short). Since these cases are interlinked, they are taken up together and considered in this order.
2. Criminal Petition No.9653 OF 2023:
The 1st petitioner is the husband of the complainant/2nd respondent and the 2nd petitioner is the mother–in-law. They are accused Nos. 1 and 2 in C.C.No.11622 of 2023. Facts in brief concerning this petition are that the 1st petitioner and the complainant get married on 30-06-2018. After the marriage registration in accordance with the Special Marriage Act, 1954 also is put in place. The 1st petitioner/husband registers a complaint before the jurisdictional Police which becomes a crime in Crime No.85 of *2020 for offences punishable under Section 3 81 of the IPC. The allegation was theft of money and gold jewels but against whom was not stated. The police conduct investigation and file a ‘C’ report. It is the allegation of the husband that statement of the complainant was recorded and notwithstanding the said recording ‘C’ report was deliberately filed. Between 30-07-2020 and 14-04-2022 two children are born from the wedlock. A complaint comes to be registered by the respondent/wife against the petitioners alleging offences punishable under Sections 4 98A, 323 r/w 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the 1961 Act on 24-01-2023. The Police after investigation filed a charge sheet not for all the aforesaid offences, but for the offence punishable under Sections 4 98A, 504 r/w 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the 1961 Act. The learned Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence on 23-05-2023 issues process to the petitioners. It is then the petitioners have knocked at the doors of this Court in the subject petition. This Court, in terms of its order dated 06-10-2023, has stayed further proceedings before the concerned Court and the same is in subsistence even today.
3. Writ Petition No.19687 of 2023: This writ petition is preferred by the wife calling in question registration of a crime by the husband. The incident that led to filing of the crime is that the wife is alleged to have been thrown out along with her children at around 4.00 a.m. on 11-06-2022 even without allowing the wife to take her documents and belongings, which happened due to frustration of certain alleged illicit relationship of the husband with another woman. O
The court emphasized that general allegations against in-laws in dowry cases without specific evidence are insufficient to justify prosecution, aiming to prevent misuse of legal provisions.
Point of Law : Section 498-A IPC was introduced with avowed object to combat the menace of harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband and his relatives. The fact that Section 498-A IPC is a co....
The court clarified that allegations against a husband must meet specific legal standards of cruelty while highlighting the misuse of matrimonial laws with generalized accusations against in-laws lac....
Legal provisions must not be misused against family members absent specific allegations; vague claims do not sustain prosecution.
Section 498A of IPC reads as husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.
The court emphasized the need for specific allegations in matrimonial disputes to avoid misuse of legal provisions by upholding false accusations against distant relatives.
General and unsupported allegations in matrimonial disputes cannot sustain criminal charges against relatives; specific acts must be demonstrated to justify prosecution.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.