SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Jhk) 1421

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Pramod Kumar Chauhan @ Pramod Chauhan, S/o Bhaglu Chauhan – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Cr.M.P. No. 1198 of 2016
Decided on : 23-02-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Sarvendra Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Suraj Verma, Mr. D.K. Malityar, Advocate

The judgment emphasizes the need for careful scrutiny of allegations in matrimonial cases, especially under section 498A of the IPC, to prevent misuse and protect innocent parties from prolonged trials.

Headnote:

498A - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - IPC Section 498A, Cr.P.C. Section 482 - Summary

Fact of the Case:

The petition was filed to quash the cognizance order and entire criminal proceeding against the petitioners, who were accused of harassing and throwing away the complainant from the house. The complainant alleged torture for additional dowry and implicated the petitioners, including minors, under section 498A of the IPC.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the allegations against the petitioners to be omnibus and lacking specific roles, especially for the minors. It noted discrepancies in the complaint and the absence of verifiable torture allegations against the petitioners.

Issues: The main issue was whether the allegations against the petitioners warranted quashing of the criminal proceedings under section 498A of the IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: The court referred to landmark judgments such as 'Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar' and 'Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand' to highlight the misuse of section 498A and the need for scrutiny of complaints in matrimonial cases. It emphasized the cautious approach in dealing with omnibus allegations and the potential impact of prolonged criminal trials on relationships.

Final Decision: The court quashed the entire criminal proceeding, including the cognizance order, against the petitioners, citing the lack of specific roles and the omnibus nature of the allegations.

JUDGMENT :

This petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing the cognizance order dated 21.08.2014 as well as entire criminal proceeding, pending in the court of learned J.M., 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with C.P.Case No.1238 of 2014.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners at the outset submits that so far petitioner no.1 who is husband of the O.P.No.2 is concerned, he is not pressing this petition on his behalf as the quashing application has already been dismissed. He submits that petitioner no.2 is mother in law, petitioner nos.3, 4, 5 and 6 are brother in law, sister in law, brother in law and cousin brother in law and petitioner nos.3,4,5 and 6 at the time of lodging of the case were 16, 14, 12 and 7 years of age, who are minors and the petitioner no.7 is father in law.

4. The case has been lodged by the O.P.No.2 stating therein that the marriage took place on 27.05.2013 between the O.P.No.2 and Pramod Kumar Chauhan @ Pramod Chauhan as per Hindu rites and custom at the house of the complainant and as per the capacity the father of the complainant gave a sum of Rs.20,000/- and household articles. After the marriage, the complaint went to her matrimonial house. After few days, she was tortured by the above named petitioners for Rs.50,000/- as additional dowry. It has been alleged that on 04.05.2014 the accused persons thrown away the O.P.No.2 from the house.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that so far the other petitioner nos. 3 to 6 are concerned, they were minor at the time of filing of the case and inspite of that, they have been implicated falsely in the case. He further submits that so far the petitioner nos.2 and 7 are concerned, there are only omnibus allegation against these two petitioners. He further submits that now the petitioners and the O.P.No.2 are residing together and there is calm atmosphere in the house.

6. The learned counsel for the O.P.No.2 submits that there are allegations and rightly the cognizance has been taken under section 498A of the I.P.C.

7. The Court has perused the complaint petition. In the light of the contentions made in the complaint petition, the only question which requires determination by this Court is whether the allegation made against the in-laws who are petitioner nos.2 to 7 are in the nature of general and omnibus allegations and in that view of the matter, the entire proceeding so far the petitioner nos.2 to 7 are concerned is required to be quashed or not?

8. Section 498A of the I.P.C was aimed at preventing cruelty committed upon a woman by the husband. It is well known that in recent times matrimonial litigation in the country has also increased significantly. In this regard, the High Courts as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court have pronounced judgments in appropriate cases and the land mark judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is “Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar”, (2014) 8 SCC 273, wherein at paragraph no.4, held as under:

    “4. There is a phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years. The institution of marriage is greatly revered in this country. Section 498-A IPC was introduced with avowed object to combat the menace of harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband and his relatives. The fact that Section 498-A IPC is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bedridden grandfathers and grandmothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested. “Crime in India 2012 Statistic

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top