ORDER :

Heard.

1) The petitioners have challenged the FIR, charge-sheet and order framing charge in Criminal Case No.13332/2022 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the IPC.

2) The facts of the present case are that the marriage between Shailendra Sahu and respondent No.2 was solemnized on 07.12.2020 at Shubhra Marriage Palace, Durg (C.G.) as per hindu rites and rituals and there is one issue from their wedlock.

3) The petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law of respondent No.2/complainant. Earlier an FIR was registered against Shailendra Sahu/ husband for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 & Section 4 of POCSO Act and later on, he was acquitted of all the charges vide judgment dated 04.08.2021 passed in Special Criminal Case No.118 of 2019. The respondent No.2 lodged a report to the effect that the petitioners along with her husband subjected her to cruelty and also demanded dowry. In FIR it is stated that the petitioners abused her and passed on taunts stating that their son was sent to jail and respondent No.2 belongs to a lower caste. It is further stated in the FIR that husband compelled her for unnatural sex, he demanded two wheeler vehicle and he usually checks her mobile phone. On such complaint, the Police registered Crime No.50 of 2022 against the petitioners and Shailendra Sahu for commission of offence punishable under Section 498-A read with Section 34 of the IPC.

4) Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that there are vague and omnibus allegations against the present petitioners, who are father-in-law and mother-in-law of respondent No.2. He would submit that the main allegations are against husband and this petition has not been preferred on his behalf. It is also stated that the witnesses namely-Pramila Meshram, Gunjeshwari Sharma and Satish Singh have categorically made allegations against Shailendra Sahu/ husband only and there are general allegations against the present petitioners. He placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kahkashan Kausar alias Sonam and others Vs. State of Bihar and others, reported in (2022) 6 SCC 599.

5) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State as well as respondent No.2 would oppose. They would submit that there are serious allegations against the present petitioners, who are father-inlaw and mother-in-law of respondent No.2. They would further submit that respondent No.2 was subjected to cruelty by the present petitioners too, therefore, the present petition preferred by the petitioners deserves to be dismissed.

6) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the charge-sheet.

7) Coming to the facts of the present case, upon a perusal of the contents of the FIR, it is revealed that general allegations are levelled against the petitioners. The complainant alleged that her father-in-law and mother-in-law harassed her and demanded dowry and she was abused by them too. Furthermore, no specific and distinct allegations have been made against them, none of the petitioners have been attributed any specific role in furtherance of the general allegations made against them. The allegations are general and omnibus and can at best be said to have been made out on account of small skirmishes. Insofar as husband is concerned, the present petition has not been filed on his behalf and there are serious allegation against him.

8) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kahkashan Kausar (supra) while dealing with similar issue in paras 10 to 18 held as under:

10. Having perused the relevant facts and contentions made by the appellants and respondents, in our considered opinion, the foremost issue which requires determination in the instant case is whether allegations made against the appellant in-laws are in the nature of general omnibus allegations and therefore liable to be quashed?

11. Before w