IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J.
Smit Amrutbhai Parmar & others – Applicants
Versus
State Of Gujarat & others – Respondents
R/Criminal Misc.Application No. 10606 of 2016
Decided On : 02-12-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 498(A), 323, 504, 506(2), 114 – Dowry several articles – Quashing of First Information Report – Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt – Punishment for criminal intimidation – Facts stated in complaint are that complainant got married as per Hindu Rites and Rituals – After marriage, she got in dowry several articles and she was discharging her duty as a wife – Held, Allegations levelled against writ applicants can be said to be vague and devoid of merit – Dispute is mainly between husband and wife – What is required to be brought to notice of Court is particulars of offence committed by each and every accused and role played by each and every accused in committing of that offence – Looking to complaint in question, complaint is sadly vague – It does not show as to which accused has committed what offence and what is exact role played by these writ-applicants in commission of offence – Writ-application allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. By way of present petitioner, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of FIR being C.R. No.I-163 of 2015 registered with Adajan Police Station, District – Surat, for the offence under Sections-498(A), 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of I.P.C.
2. The brief facts stated in the complaint are that the complainant got married as per Hindu Rites and Rituals at Bardoli on 17.05.2014 with Smith Parmar. After marriage, she got in dowry several articles and she was discharging her duty as a wife. It is alleged that after some time of marriage, the husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law had started giving torture in trifle. It was alleged that the sister-in-law and her husband residing at Sneh Sankul Wadi used to come at her matrimonial house and used to give physical and mental torture. It is further stated that the brother-in-law and his wife had stayed together for 1 & 1/2 months and they also used to taunt her and thereafter they shifted to America. After shifting to America, they used to talk with husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law through video call and used to give mental torture.
2.1 It is further alleged that at the time of marriage, the uncle-in-law Narendrabhai and Amrutbhai had assured the father of the complainant that the studies of the complainant would be continued even after marriage. It is alleged that after marriage, the husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law, sister-in-law and her husband used to give torture by creating hindrance in her studies. It is alleged that the parents of complainant had tried to intervene, they were also abused and husband of sister-in-law Viz.Kiritbhai gave kick and fist blows to him and therefore, father of the complainant brought the complainant back at parental home. When the aforesaid fact was informed to Narendrabhai and Amrutbhai, they also give threat that the complainant has to adjust as per the say of in-laws.
2.2 It is alleged that at the time of Diwali Festival, the uncle of complainant Viz. Arvindbhai telephoned to the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant and asked to take complainant back and the uncle was asked to husband and upon talking with husband, the husband sent message to the complainant that if she wants to stay with husband then she has to cut relations with her parents. With a view to save marriage life, she went to matrimonial home at Ukai and at that time, the father of complainant and complainant talked with the brother-in-law staying at America, he takes decision in the house and his decision is final and the matter is still not over and thus, she was subjected to physical and mental torture. It is alleged that the complainant was also forced to undergo abortion and thereafter she was sent to her parental home in a bus and as the condition of the complainant was not good, she was taken to Bardoli hospital, she was asked to take treatment at the hospital, in which, she has earlier taken there and therefore, her parents again dropped her to matrimonial home and again after three months, she was subjected to physical and mental torture and given some medicine forcefully and therefore, she was taken to hospital and the doctor has informed the police and thereafter she was sent to her parents house.
2.3 It is alleged that thereafter, the complainant had gone to her matrimonial home alongwith her cousin for taking back her articles and at that time, she was asked by all accused to bring either BMW Car or Rs.30 Lakh for husband so that he can settle in America. Thus, the complainant registered complaint being C.R. No.I-163 of 2015 registered with Adajan Police Station, District – Surat, for the offence under Sections- 498(A), 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of I.P.C. against the applicants- accused.
3. Heard Ms. Kruti Shah, learned advocate appearing for the applicants – accused; Mr. Adeshara, learned advocate appearing for the respondent no.2 – complainant and Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned APP appearing for the respondent – State.
4. At the outse
SupremeToday
Vague and generic allegations in a matrimonial dispute do not meet the threshold for criminal prosecution under Section 498A IPC, warranting quashing of FIR.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of specific and serious allegations in cases involving matrimonial disputes, highlighting the potential abuse of process of law when vague and non-specific alle....
Specific allegations are essential to establish a prima facie case under IPC Sections 406 and 498-A; general allegations are insufficient for prosecution.
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.