General allegations in matrimonial disputes under Section 498A cannot warrant prosecution without specific roles attributed to individual accused, highlighting concerns over misuse of the law.

ORDER :

(M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.)

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.813/2018 pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Kudligi for the offences punishable under Section 4 98A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 .

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this Court has quashed the proceedings qua accused Nos.2, 3, 6 and 7 in Crl.P.No.102418/2021 and qua accused No.4 in Crl.P.No.101229/2020 and the present petitioner is accused No.5, who was a security guard in the house, who is also drawn into the web of crime for the offences punishable under Section 4 98A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 .

3. In the light of the order so passed quashing the proceedings against the other members of the family and present petitioner being a security guard in the house, I deem it appropriate to grant the benefit of such quashment to the present petitioner/accused No.5 as well.

4. This Court while quashing the proceedings qua accused Nos.2, 3, 6 and 7 in Crl.P.No.102418/2021 has held as follows:-

"9. The afore narrated facts are not in dispute. The relationship between the parties, is as narrated hereinabove. Accused No.1 who is not before the Court gets married to the respondent No.2 – complainant. The relationship between the accused No.1 and the respondent No.2 turns sour, which results in registration of the complaint on 18.06.2017. A perusal at the complaint would clearly indicate that the offences are against the husband or other members of the family and not the petitioners, who are accused Nos.2, 3, 6 & 7 in relation mother-in-law, father-in-law, sister-in-law and brother-in-law.

10. The Police conduct investigation and file a charge sheet. The summary of the charge sheet as obtaining in column No.17 reads as follows:

11. A perusal of the summary of the charge sheet would indicate various grievances of the respondent No.2 - complainant, who is the wife of the accused No.1 against the accused No.1. The petitioners are accused Nos.2, 3, 6 & 7 against whom there is not even a speck of allegation. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would further take this Court through the statements recorded prior to filing of the charge sheet, in order to demonstrate that there are no allegations against these petitioners. A perusal at the statements would vindicate the submission of the learned counsel, the summary of the charge sheet also does not indicate the presence of any ingredients that would become an offence under Section 4 98A of the IPC or even Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

12. In the light of no ingredients of any offence found in the summary of the charge sheet or the statements further proceedings if permitted to be continued would run foul of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kahkashan Kausar Alias Sonam and others Vs. State of Bihar and others reported in (2022) 6 SCC 599 , wherein the Apex Court has held as follows:

"Issue involved

10. Having perused the relevant facts and contentions made by the appellants and respondents, in our considered opinion, the foremost issue which requires determination in the instant case is whether allegations made against the appellant in-laws are in the nature of general omnibus allegations and therefore liable to be quashed?

11. Before we delve into greater detail on the nature and content of allegations made, it becomes pertinent to mention that incorporation of Section 498-A IPC was aimed at preventing cruelty committed upon a woman by her husband and her in-laws, by facilitating rapid State intervention. However,