IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
Chiranjit Acharya – Petitioner
Versus
Kakali Acharya and Another – Respondents
CRR No. 962 of 2019
Decided On : 16-04-2024
498A - Matrimonial Dispute - 498A, 326, 34 IPC - The court discussed the provisions of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and its essential ingredients. It highlighted the misuse of the provision and the need for caution in dealing with matrimonial cases. The court also emphasized the importance of scrutinizing allegations with care and circumspection to prevent abuse of the process of law. The judgment quashed the proceedings in G.R. Case No. 3879 of 2015 under Sections 498A, 326, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashing of proceedings in a case pending under Sections 498A, 326, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging false complaints by the opposite party after 16 years of marriage.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the allegations in the written complaint were general in nature and did not make out a prima facie case against the petitioner. It concluded that permitting the case to proceed towards trial would be an abuse of the process of law.
Issues: The foremost issue was whether the allegations made against the petitioner were in the nature of general omnibus allegations and liable to be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for caution in dealing with matrimonial cases and scrutinizing allegations with care and circumspection to prevent abuse of the process of law. It highlighted the misuse of Section 498A and the increased tendency to implicate relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes.
Final Decision: The court allowed the revision petition and quashed the proceedings in G.R. Case No. 3879 of 2015 pending under Sections 498A, 326, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code in respect of the petitioner.
JUDGMENT :
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.
1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of proceedings in G.R. Case No. 3879 of 2015 pending before the Learned 4th Judicial Magistrate at Barrackpore under Sections 498A, 326 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The parties were married on 24th January, 1999. A child was born on 8th June, 2004.
3. The petitioner states that the opposite party is a Doctor (M.B.B.S.) who left her husband’s house leaving her husband and minor son at her own will on 11.07.2015 with her all belongings (after 16 years of marriage) and made a written false complaint being Belghoria Police Station Case No. 448 of 2015 under Sections 498A, 323, 506, 406 and 34 under Indian Penal Code dated 12.07.2015 against her husband, mother-in-law, maternal uncle and Ramita Chakraborty (sister-in-law).
4. The allegation in the written complaint is to the effect that:
That I used to tolerate all of physical and mental torture due to the future of my son and at finally prestige till today.
That for your kind information that since after my marriage I never spent a single day happily with my husband and he only money and wants the same more and more.
That on today 11/07/2015 at about 8.75 AM my husband at the instance of my mother-in-law Smt. Puspa Acharya started beating and blows on my right fareness right side of my back and according I sustained on my body. And thereafter I was by my husband with rough language on “Tui amar ghar theke ak kapore beriye ja magi, thana police court kachari te amar lok aache, dekhi tui amr ki koris” and accordingly I rushed to the Belghoria Police Station for lodging F.I.R. against my husband mother-in-law, maternal uncle and Nanad (Ramita Chakraborty who also use to commitment at torture on me and used to provoke my husband to leave me by way of that under son I was fared by my husband and mother-in-law having my only son Riddhiman Acharya alongwith my Stridhan property including any identity, PAN CARD, Passport etc. etc. and other valuable documents I, want to get back from to custody of my husband.
Now I pray please to take steps against my husband and other in makes of my matrimonial u/s 498A/323/506/406 and 34 IPC and I further pray that my only son in any physically mentally insecured without me my matrimonial home at any material point of time and accordingly you take proper steps as per law.”
5. The copy of the medical paper annexed shows some abrasions (one the back of right hand). No other external injury was found by the doctor.
6. The opposite party has refused service in this case.
7. From the case diary and other materials on record it appears that there is a dispute between the parties regarding their family members.
8. The dispute is more of some differences in their matrimonial life leading to separation after almost 16 years of marriage and also having a child, in spite of both the parties being educated and well placed.
9. Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, lays down:
Explanation - For the purposes of this section “cruelty” means:
(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (wh
Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Another
Anand Kumar Mohatta and Another vs. State (NCT of Delhi), Department of Home and Another
G.V. Rao vs. L.H.V. Prasad and Others
Geeta Mehrotra and Another vs. State of U.P. and Another
Joseph Salvaraj A. vs. State of Gujarat and Others
K. Subba Rao vs. State of Telangana
Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam and Others vs. State of Bihar and Others
Neelu Chopra and Another vs. Bharti
Preeti Gupta and Another vs. State of Jharkhand and Another
R.P. Kapur vs. State of Punjab
The judgment established the importance of scrutinizing allegations in matrimonial cases and cautioned against implicating relatives of the husband without specific evidence.
The court emphasized the necessity of specific allegations in Section 498A IPC cases to prevent misuse and quashed proceedings lacking prima facie evidence.
The court established that specific allegations are necessary to sustain a charge under Section 498A IPC, preventing misuse of the provision in matrimonial disputes.
The judgment emphasizes the need for specific allegations in cases involving Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and cautions against false implications by way of general omnibus allegations.
The judgment established the importance of specific allegations and cautioned against implicating relatives of the husband without prima facie evidence in cases under Section 498A of the Indian Penal....
The judgment established the importance of specific evidence and cautioned against general omnibus allegations in matrimonial disputes, emphasizing the potential misuse of Section 498A IPC and the ne....
The court held that the ingredients required to constitute the offences under Sections 498A/406/506 of the Indian Penal Code are clearly absent in the present case and the allegations are general and....
In cases where the materials in the case diary and the charge sheet do not prima facie make out a case of cognizable offence against the accused, the proceedings should be quashed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.