Legal provisions must not be misused against family members absent specific allegations; vague claims do not sustain prosecution.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the registration of a crime in Crime No.337/2022 registered for offences punishable under Sections 498A, 342, 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('the IPC' for short).

2. Heard Sri. Sanjay Yadav B., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. K. Nageshwarappa, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1.

3. The complainant and accused No.1 get married on 12.11.2011. It transpires that the relationship between accused No.1 and the complainant flounders. On floundering of the said relationship, the parties are before the Family Court in MC.No.318/2019. The wife then registers several proceedings including a proceeding under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance. The issue in the lis does not pertain to those proceedings between the husband and the wife. The complainant/respondent No.2 registers a complaint on 17.11.2022, which becomes a crime in Crime No.337/2022 for the aforesaid offences. The petitioner is arraigned as accused No.4. The arraigning of the petitioner as accused No.4 is what has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in no way concerned with the happenings in the family between accused Nos.1 to 3 and the complainant. The petitioner is the younger sister of accused No.2, that is the mother-in-law of the complainant, and does not even reside with the couple. The only allegation against this petitioner in the complaint is that she has orchestrated the behaviour of the husband or members of the family to treat the complainant badly. Barring this, the learned counsel submits that there is no other allegation that would drive home the offences.

5. The complainant though served long ago has remained unrepresented, even today. Therefore, the learned High Court Government Pleader is heard.

6. The learned High Court Government Pleader on perusal of the complaint or the material of investigation as was done till the date on which the stay was granted would submit that the investigation must be permitted to be continued against this petitioner as well as there is some material to show the involvement of the petitioner in the affairs of the family of the complainant. Therefore, would seek dismissal of the petition.

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 a matter of record or averment in the petition itself. The entire issue gets triggered by the complaint so registered by the complainant/respondent No.2. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to notice the complaint. The complaint reads as follows:

"To:

Sub Inspector,

White field Police Station.

Subject:- Application to Complaint against my husband Mr. Rajgopal Surath.

Respected Sir,

I. Mrs Ashwini Surath, currently residing at # 1627, Divyashree Republic of White field, Divyashree Technopark EPIP 560 066, has been repeatedly beaten up, harassed physically, verbally and mentally by Mr Rajgopal Surath who is also residing at the same place since Oct 23. I had already launched one NCR at Whitefield Police Station on the 29 Oct 22 (NCR No. 575/2022). On Monday 13/14 November early morning post 12 am Rajgopal had been drinking and abusing me.. In night me, my daughter and maid went to master bedroom to sleep and Rajgopal went to next bedroom. In night it was very cold, so I got up around 2 am to get extra blanket 'from the room. Rajgopal was awake and browsing phone. Upon seeing me he started abusing me and using smear words. I told him I only came t