IMPORTANT POINT
Vague and general allegations in domestic violence cases are insufficient for prosecution; specific instances must be provided to avoid misuse of legal provisions.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

1. The petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing FIR No. 32/2022, dated 07.06.2022, registered at Police Station, Ram Shahar District, Solan HP, for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 498A and 323, read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code (IPC). The charge sheet titled State versus Jai Pal pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Nalagarh and all the consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR. (The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience)

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the informant, Divya Kumari, made a complaint to the police asserting that she was married to the petitioner, Jaipal, on 3^rd May 2022. The petitioners started harassing her soon after her marriage. She made a complaint to the Police Station Ram Shahar on 13^th May, and the matter was referred to the Child Development Project Officer (CDPO), who effected a compromise between the parties on 18^th May. However, the petitioners continued to harass the informant and compelled her to bring a dowry. Her father-in-law, Sohan Lal, her mother-in-law, Jayati and her husband, Jaipal, beat her on the 3^rd of June. Neighbours heard her cries and informed her father about the beatings. He reported the matter to the police. The petitioners threatened to kill the informant. Her husband took her to the house of his relative at Solan. No food was provided to her, and she was not allowed to talk to her parents. Her father went to her matrimonial home to take her to her parental home on the 6^th of June, but she was not allowed to leave her matrimonial home. When the informant went to her parental home with her father, her money and ornaments were kept by the petitioner. She told her parents about her harassment and beating. The police registered the FIR and conducted the investigation. They found that the informant’s name and her marriage were not registered in the Panchayat. A copy of the compromise effected between the parties was also taken into possession. It was found that the petitioners had agreed to maintain the informant properly, however, they failed to honour their promise. The police recorded the statements of the witnesses and, after the completion of the investigation, filed a chargesheet against the petitioners for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 498A and 323 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

3. Being aggrieved from the registration of the FIR and the filing of the charge sheet before the learned Trial Court, the petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing the FIR and consequential proceedings arising out of it. It has been asserted that the informant started quarrelling with the petitioners soon after her marriage on one pretext or another. She proclaimed that her husband was not of her choice, and she wanted to marry someone else with whom she had friendly relations. She asked her husband to divorce her and pay a substantial amount to her so that she could marry her friend. She threatened the petitioners that they would suffer if her demands were not met. The petitioners disclosed the entire episode to the informant’s father on 12^th May 2022. He also tried to convince the informant, however, she filed a false complaint against the petitioners on 13^th May 2022. The matter was compromised on 18^th May 2022. The informant remained calm for 2-3 days but started hurling abuses at the petitioners and causing embarrassment to them. Her husband took her to Solan so that she could change herself but in vain. The informant made a false story about the demand for a dowry. Mother-in-law of the informant, her daughter and her maternal grandchildren were kidnapped by the informant with the help of other persons. They were given merciless beatings. An FIR was registered against the informant and other persons. Petitioner No. 1 was also bea