The court quashed the FIR against family members due to vague allegations, establishing that involvement in matrimonial disputes is impermissible unless specific accusations exist.

ORDER :

(S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.)

In this petition, the petitioners seek the following reliefs:

"Wherefore, it is most humbly prayed this Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the petition and quash the FIR in Cr.No.50/2025 on the file of 37^th Addl. CMM Court, Nrupathunga Road, Bangalore registered by respondent South Women police for the offences punishable under Section 85 & 3(5) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ) and Sec.3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 as against the petitioners in interest of justice and equity."

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record.

3. Respondent No.2, having been served with notice of this petition, has chosen to remain unrepresented and has not contested the petition.

4. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent No.2/defacto complainant is the wife of one Chetan Kumar.P.N. Petitioner No.1 is the mother of the said Chetan Kumar while petitioner No.2 is his sister. On 12.05.2025, respondent No.2/defecto complainant filed the instant complaint against her husband-accused No.1 and the petitioners herein-accused Nos.2 and 3 which was registered as an FIR in Crime No.50/2025 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 85 & 3(5) of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhita ( BNS ) and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

5. In this context, the said complaint reads as under:

6. A bare perusal of the aforesaid impugned complaint and the FIR would indicate that all the allegations are primarily directed as against her husband-accused No.1 and except vague, bald, omnibus and general allegations, no specific allegations and instances attracting the aforesaid offences are made as against the petitioners-accused Nos.2 and 3. As a result of which, it is clear that thereby leading to the sole conclusion that the offences alleged against the petitioners are not disclosed in the impugned complaint and the FIR.

7. It is also relevant to state that the Apex Court and this Court repeatedly said that dragging the parents-in-law into matrimonial disputes between husband and wife has been severely depreciated and impermissible in law as held by the Apex Court in the cases of Digambar and Anr vs. State of Maharashtra " [2024 INSC 1019] and Geddam Jhansi and Anr. Vs State Of Telangana and Ors. [2025 INSC 160] .

8. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that continuation of the impugned proceedings qua the petitioners/accused Nos.2 and 3 would amount to abuse of process of law warranting interference by this Court in the present petition.

9. In the result, the following:

ORDER

i) The criminal petition is allowed.

ii) The impugned proceedings in Crime No.50/2025 pending before 37th Addl. CMM Court, Nrupathunga Road, Bangalore registered by respondent-Police, qua the petitioners, are hereby quashed.