The court established that vague and omnibus allegations against distant relatives in dowry death cases are inadequate to substantiate charges under IPC Sections 304B and 498A, requiring specific evidence of involvement.

ORDER :

M. Nagaprasanna, J.

The petitioners are before this Court calling in question proceedings in SC.No.742/2023 registered for offences punishable under Sections 3 04B and 498A read with Section 3 4 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 ('the IPC ' for short) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 .

2. Heard Shri Sunil Kumar S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri B.N. Jagadish, learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1. The complainant though served on 17.07.2023 has remained unrepresented despite passage of two years.

3. Facts in brief germane are as follows:

Accused No.1, the husband of the deceased gets married to one Smt. Shaila Budihal on 21.12.2018. The relationship between the two appears to have turned sore and on various grievances, the wife of accused No.1 commits suicide on 26.02.2021. The commission of suicide of the wife of accused No.1 leads towards registration of a complaint by her brother. The complaint then becomes a crime in crime No.17/2021 for offences punishable under Sections 3 04B and 498A read with Section 3 4 of the IPC . At the time of registration of the crime, the offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act were not alleged. The police conduct investigation and conduct of investigation leads to filing of the charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 3 for offences punishable under Sections 3 04B and 498A read with Section 3 4 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Filing of the charge sheet is what drives the petitioners, the father-in-law and the sister-in-law of the deceased before this Court, they are accused Nos.2 and 3. The husband - accused No.1 is not before the Court.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would vehemently contend that the father of accused No.1 is now 84years old and at the time of the incident was 79years old. There is no allegation against him that he has either tortured for demand of dowry or otherwise. Petitioner No.2 is accused No.3 - the sister in law.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the sister-in-law did not even reside with the couple, she is residing elsewhere with her family. The only allegation against the sister-in-law is as vaguely put that she had at one point in time demanded Rs.5,00,000/-. Barring this, he would submit that there is nothing that would touch upon the ingredients of either Sections 304B and 498A of the IPC or even the provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He would seek quashment of the proceedings qua these petitioners.

6. Per contra, the learned Additional Special Public Prosecutor while taking this Court through the contents of the charge sheet would submit that there are at least sprinkling allegations against the petitioners herein. The police after investigation have filed a charge sheet and therefore, this Court at this juncture in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should not interfere and it is for the petitioners to come out clean in a full bloom trial.

7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the available material on record.

8. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The relationship between the parties to the lis are as narrated. Accused No.1 - husband is not before the Court. He gets married to the sister of the complainant on 21.12.2018. It transpires that the relationship between the two turns sore. Turning sore leads the sister of the complainant to commit suicide. The allegation now falls at the doors of the members of t