Specific allegations are required to implicate family members in dowry-related criminal cases; general accusations without substantiation constitute an abuse of legal process.

Judgement:

ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA, J.

1. The present CRLMC application has been filed by the Petitioner with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 25.06.2025, under Annexure-2, and the entire criminal proceeding against the Petitioner in Chandrasekharpur P.S. Case No.330 of 2023 corresponding to C.T. Case No.837 of 2023, for commission of offences punishable under sections 498A/341/323/294/506/34 of the IPC read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, pending in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class-II, Bhubaneswar.

FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The factual matrix of the case leading to the filing of the present CRLMC application, as gathered form the F.I.R and Charge-sheet, is as follows; initially an F.I.R was lodged on 13.07.2023 and registered as Chandrasekharpur P.S. Case No.330 of 2023 against the present Petitioner, alleging commission of offences under the IPC as well as the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘DP Act’). The Informant in the present case is the sister-in-law of the Petitioner, this implies that the Petitioner is the younger brother of the husband of the Informant- Opposite Party No.2. The marriage between the Informant-Opposite Party No.2 and the Petitioner’s older brother was earlier solemnized on 23.01.2019, and the Informant’s parents have allegedly given a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- along with around 200gm of gold ornaments and other valuables to the groom’s family. However, after a few days of the solemnization of marriage, the Informant’s in-laws and husband demanded a further sum of Rs.30,00,000/- as dowry. Since the informant expressed her inability to fulfil the same, she was allegedly harassed and tortured, mentally and physically, in pursuance of such dowry demand, by her in-laws and husband.

3. The F.I.R further reveals that not only was the Informant-Opposite Party No.2, who happened to be a doctor, not allowed to continue her medicine practice or pursue higher education but also on 04.03.2019, 24.05.2019, 19.01.2021, and several other occasions the husband and her in-laws would physically torture, including strangulating the Informant till the point she passes out and then confining her to a room. As per the F.I.R, on one such occasion while the Informant was being physically assaulted by her husband and a few of her in-laws, she was saved at the last moment by her mother-in-law and grandfather-in-law. An attempt was once also made to find common ground between the parties and mutually resolve the issue by holding a discussion between the families of the parties. However, such discussion could not fructify into something tangible on account of the Informant’s husband abusing and assaulting the Informant and her mother by hurling chairs at them and attempting to assault them with a Panikhi. Apart from the aforesaid instances of assault and abuse, the in-laws and husband of the Informant have also, on many occasions, threatened to kill the Informant if she ever attempted to lodge any complaint against the perpetrators.

4. Consequently, the Informant-Opposite Party No.2 lodged the F.I.R, at Annexure-1, implicating her husband and in-laws including the Petitioner. After registration of the F.I.R, the investigation in the matter was initiated, the seizure list, zimanama, and injury report were prepared and, statement of witnesses were recorded under section 161 of Cr.P.C, available at Annexure-3. Finally, the Investigating Officer has filed the impugned Charge-sheet bearing C.S No.465 on 25.06.2025, at Annexure- 2, against the present Petitioner, among others, as t