IMPORTANT POINT
Vague and omnibus allegations under Section 498A do not suffice to sustain criminal proceedings, especially when made in retaliation to a divorce petition.

ORDER :

Petitioners are accused nos.1 to 3 in Crime No.445/2022 of Feroke Police Staion, Kozhikode, which was originally taken on file as C.C.No.961/2022 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-V, Kozhikode; and now made over to the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court – II (Mobile), Kozhikode as C.C.No.457/2024. The offences alleged are under Sections 498 A, read with Section 34 of the Penal Code . The petitioners seek quashment of the said crime and all further proceedings therefrom.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners; learned counsel for the 3^rd respondent and also the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the records.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the 1^st petitioner is the husband and petitioners 2 and 3 are the mother and father respectively. They are accused nos.1 to 3 respectively before the trial court. Learned counsel would invite the attention of this court to the chronology of events, which took place in the instant case. The marriage was solemnised on 30.08.2021 and on the very next day, 31.08.2021, the defacto complainant/wife was taken to her relative's house by her parents. According to the petitioners, the reason behind such shifting is the epileptic seizures of the defacto complainant/wife, which was suppressed from the notice of the petitioners before marriage. On 07.09.2021, Annexure-A6 notice was issued by the 1^st petitioner seeking the co-operation of the defacto complainant and her family to get the marriage adjudged void. On 11.09.2021, a complaint was preferred by the defacto complainant, produced at Annexure-A7, before the jurisdictional Inspector of Police, seeking his assistance to get back her gold ornaments and personal belongings. Learned counsel would emphasise that there is no whisper, whatsoever, with respect to any harassment meted out against the defacto complainant in Annexure-A7. Thereafter, Annexure-A8 agreement was entered into by and between the 1^st petitioner/husband and the defacto complainant/wife, which records the factum of return of gold ornaments, including the thali. The last paragraph of Annexure-A8 would record that no other belonging of the defacto complainant is remaining with the petitioner. In Annexure-A8 also, there is no whisper with respect to any harassment or the like against the defacto complainant. On 20.05.2022, the petitioner filed an Original Petition for nullity of marriage, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-A10. Petitioners' counsel would explain that the same was filed when the defacto complainant failed to act in terms of Annexure-A8 agreement. It is true that, in Annexure-A10 Original Petition, certain allegations were made, which would affect the reputation of the defacto complainant. However, learned counsel for the petitioners would explain that such allegations were made on factual aspects, as revealed from a mobile phone left by the defacto complainant with the petitioners. It is upon getting notice in the said Original Petition that the defacto complainant came to realise that her mobile phone is with the petitioners and that her personal information have been gathered by the petitioners. It is in such circumstance that the petitioners chose to give an F.I.S and accordingly, Annexure-A1 F.I.R was registered on 06.08.2022. Learned counsel would submit that there is no bonafides, whatsoever, in the First Information Statement preferred by the defacto complainant. Thereupon, the learned counsel invited the attention of this Court to the F.I.S, to point out that the allegations therein are quite vague and omnibus, incapable of attracting the offence under Section 498 A of the Penal Code . On such premise, petitioner seeks Annexure-A1 F.I.R, Annexure-A2 Final Report, and all further proceedings in C.C.No.457/2024 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II (Mobile), Kozhikode to be quashed. Learned counsel would emphasise the aspect that the defacto complainant has stayed with the petitioners only for a day,