Mere allegations of domestic cruelty must be specific; generalized claims against family members without evidence should not form the basis of prosecution.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the orders dated 16.06.2015 and 14.12.2016, passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat in connection with Peterwar (Tenughat O.P.) P.S. Case No. 19 of 2015 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 147 of 2015 whereby and where under respectively the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code upon submission of charge sheet by the police against the petitioners and other co-accused persons and framed charges and read over and explained the charges to the accused persons.

3. The allegations against the petitioners are that the petitioners after fifteen days from 08.05.2014 till lodging of the case at village Chapi being the husband and/or relatives of the informant subjected the informant to mental and physical cruelty by demanding dowry of Rs.2,00,000/-, one Maruti Car and five tola of gold and thereby they have committed the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. In the meanwhile, four prosecution witnesses have been examined including the informant and they have all supported the case of the prosecution.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Dara Lakshmi Narayana and Others Vs. State of Telangana and Another , (2025) 3 SCC 735, that in para -27 thereof, it has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that a mere reference to the names of a family members in a criminal case arising out of a matrimonial dispute, without specific allegations indicating their active involvement should be nipped in bud. It was also observed therein that it is a well- recognised fact, borne out of judicial experience, that there is often a tendency to implicate all the members of the husband’s family when domestic disputes arise out of a matrimonial discord. Therefore, such generalised and sweeping accusations unsupported by concrete evidence or particularised allegations cannot form the basis for criminal prosecution. Hence, the Courts must exercise caution in such cases to prevent misuse of legal provisions and the legal process and avoid unnecessary harassment of innocent family members. It is next submitted that in para-31 of the said judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has clarified that the woman who has suffered cruelty in terms of what has been contemplated under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code should not remain silent and forbear herself from making a complaint or initiating any criminal proceeding but in a case like the one before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India; as in that case where, as a counterblast to the petition for dissolution of marriage sought by the first appellant- husband of the complainant in that case, a complaint under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is lodged; it was observed that such complaints should not be encouraged. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are false and in the F.I.R., fake and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed.

5. The learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer as prayed for by the petitioners in this criminal miscellaneous petition and submits that the trial is at an advance stage and four of the witnesses of the prosecution including the v