The court established that general and omnibus allegations against in-laws in dowry cases under Section 498A IPC may lead to misuse of legal processes, requiring specific claims to warrant prosecution.

JUDGMENT :

CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.

1. Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Rahul Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for O.P. No.2.

2. The present application has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of the order dated 12.12.2023 as passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur in Complaint Case No.1051 of 2023, whereby the learned jurisdictional Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 323 , 498-A read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘ IPC ’) against the petitioners.

3. The case of prosecution is based upon the written complaint of one Priyanka Devi/O.P. No.2/complainant alleging therein that she got married on 28.11.2022 with one Gyaneshwar Kumar as per Hindu rituals with the consent of both family members. The husband of the complainant was working as Loco-pilot in Railway and father- in-law (petitioner no.1) is a Sub-Inspector in police department, whereas the complainant is B.A. and is a house wife. It is further stated that soon after the marriage, a demand of four wheeler vehicle, diamond ring and cash of Rs.5 lakh was made from the complainant but, due to non- fulfilment of demand, on 14.04.2023, her mother-in-law (petitioner no.2) and nanad (sister-in-law) Preety have badly beaten her and on the order of petitioner no.1, namely, Rajendra Singh, the husband of complainant also beaten her. Thereafter, the complainant informed about the occurrence to her parents and again on 16.05.2023, her husband, mother- in-law and nanad have assaulted her and asked her to call her father and further threatened for dire consequences, if their demand of dowry would not be fulfilled.

4. On the basis of aforesaid written complaint, a complaint case bearing Case No.1051 of 2023 dated 23.05.2023 was filed under Sections 498 -A, 307, 323, 120- B, 406 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioners and others and, thereafter, an inquiry was conducted under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘CrPC’), whereafter, learned Magistrate took cognizance for the offences under Sections 3 23 , 498-A read with 34 of the was taken and process have been issued against accused persons including petitioners.

5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for petitioners that both petitioners are in-laws and facing general and omnibus allegation qua alleged cruelty and demand of dowry. It is pointed out that the husband of O.P. No.2 was working with Indian Railway and soon after the marriage, he was diagnosed for Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD), after which, the O.P. No.2 left her matrimonial home on her own. It is submitted that petitioner no.1, who is father-in-law is working with Bihar Police as Sub-Inspector and he usually remains at place of his posting. It is submitted that the thrust of allegation is available against husband of O.P. No.2, who is facing trial. It is pointed out that during the period of hospitalization and treatment of her husband, O.P. No.2 never visited her matrimonial home or hospital on several request and she flatly refused to live with her husband.

6. It is submitted that in the aforesaid background, the implication of petitioners appear out of ulterior and oblique motive with malicious approach only for the reason that the petitioners are parents of husband of O.P. No.2, namely, Gyaneshwar Kumar. It is pointed out that due to said kidney disease, the husband of O.P. No.2 lost his job in the year 2023. In support of his submissions, learned counsel has relied upon the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as available through Abhishek vs. State