Generalized accusations against family members in matrimonial disputes without specific allegations of active involvement in dowry demands or assaults do not sustain criminal prosecution; quashing warranted to curb abuse.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

Heard the parties.

2. Though notice has been validly served upon the opposite party No.2 yet no one turns up on behalf of the opposite party No.2 in spite of repeated calls.

3. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding in connection with C-849 of 2018 including the order taking cognizance dated 18.09.2018 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa whereby and where under the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa has found prima facie case inter alia against the petitioners for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 323, 342, 406, 498A, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 , 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

4. The brief fact of the case is that the allegation of the complainant is that consequent upon her marriage with her husband, her husband demanded Rs.11,00,000/- to invest in his business at Bangalore to be given by the father of the complainant and he used to assault the complainant for the purpose of coercing her to meet the said unlawful demand. There is also allegation that on 12.01.2018, the complainant was assaulted and all her certificates and testimonials were taken away and she came to her father’s house. There is further allegation that on 29.04.2018, all the accused persons of the case came to the house of her father and wanted to forcibly make the complainant sign the divorce paper and when the complainant refused to do so, they assaulted her.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sushila & Others vs. State of U.P. & Others reported in 2025 INSC 505 and submits that therein, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India relied upon its own judgment in the case of Dara Lakshmi Narayana & Others vs. State of Telangana & Another reported in (2024) INSC 953 wherein in the facts of that case, as in the FIR, no substantial and specific allegations was made against appellant Nos.2 to 6 other than stating that they used to instigate appellant No.1 for demanding more dowry. It was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that a mere reference to the names of family members in a criminal case arising out of a matrimonial dispute, without specific allegations indicating their active involvement should be nipped in the bud and the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India further went on to held that it is a well recognized 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. Such generalized and sweeping accusations unsupported by concrete evidence or particularized allegations cannot form the basis for criminal prosecution. Therefore, 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 this case also, the main allegation is against the husband of the complainant and the allegation against the petitioners are general and omnibus in nature and of doing mar-pit. There is no material to show that any hurt was caused to the complainant nor is there any specific allegation against the petitioners of causing hurt to the complainant or demanding dowry or any money or harassing the complainant in any manner. Learned counsel for the petitioners furt