Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, J.
Mool Kawar Mehta (Smt.) & Others v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Another
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 2964 of 2024 (Jabalpur); Decided on 26.2.2024
(1) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 482 -- Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 498A, 506 and 34 -- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 -- Ss. 3 and 4 -- separate residence -- whether applicants were residing separately from complainant and her husband -- cannot be adjudicated while exercising power u/s. 482 of CrPC -- it is matter of evidence -- has to be proved by leading cogent evidence before trial Court. [Para 6]
(2) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 482 -- scope of power -- whether defence taken by applicants is correct or whether allegations made by complainant are correct -- are disputed questions of fact -- cannot be decided unless and until their evidence is tested on anvil of cross-examination. [Para 8]
(3) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 482 -- quashing of FIR -- Court can quash proceedings only if uncontroverted allegations do not make out offence -- from plain reading of FIR, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out -- application dismissed. (2015) 11 SCC 260, (2019) 10 SCC 337, (2018) 5 SCC 718, (2011) 12 SCC 319, (2019) 13 SCC 350, (2010) 11 SCC 226, (2019) 10 SCC 373, CBI (2019) 10 SCC 686, Cr. A. No. 709 of 2021 decided on 30.6.2021, (2018) 5 SCC 678, (2014) 15 SCC 221, (2012) 4 SCC 547, S. (2010) 5 SCC 600, (2019) 2 SCC 336, (2012) 9 SCC 460, (2012) 12 SCC 437 and (2009) 9 SCC 682 followed. [Para 11]
(4) Penal Code, 1860 -- S. 498A -- cruelty -- compelling married woman to live in her parental home on account of cruelty -- is continuous offence of cruelty. (2019) 5 SCC 384 followed. Criminal Revision No. 2376 of 2020 decided on 22.6.2021 (Gwalior) relied on. [Paras 12 & 13]
(5) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 498A, 506 and 34 -- territorial jurisdiction -- respondent No. 2/complainant residing in Bhopal -- Mahila Thana, Bhopal also has territorial jurisdiction to investigate matter. [Para 14]
(6) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 482 -- Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 498A, 506 and 34 -- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 -- Ss. 3 and 4 -- quashing of FIR -- case of respondent No. 2/complainant that on account of demand of dowry, not only was she mentally and physically harassed, but was turned out of her matrimonial house -- specific allegations against applicants -- cannot be termed as general, omnibus or vague -- interference not warranted. (2022) 3 SCC 93 followed. [Paras 7, 14 & 15]
¼1½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & /kkjk 482 & naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 498d 506 rFkk 34 & ngst çfr"ks/k vf/kfu;e] 1961 & /kkjk 3 rFkk 4 & i`Fkd~ fuokl & vkosndx.k ifjokfnuh vkSj mlds ifr ls i`Fkd~ fuokl dj jgs Fks ;k ugha & naM çfØ;k lafgrk dh /kkjk 482 ds v/khu 'kfä ç;qä djrs le; U;k;fu.khZr ugha fd;k tk ldrk & ;g lk{; dk fo"k; gS & fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k rdZiw.kZ lk{; is'k dj ds lkfcr fd;k tkuk gksrk gSA ¼iSjk 6½
¼2½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & /kkjk 482 & 'kfä dh O;kfIr & vkosndx.k }kjk yh xbZ çfrj{kk lgh gS ;k ifjokfnuh }kjk fd, x, vfHkdFku lgh gSa & rF; ds fookfnr ç'u gSa & rc rd fofuf'pr ugha fd, tk ldrs tc rd muds lk{; dks çfrijh{kk dh dlkSVh ij ij[kk ugha tkrkA ¼iSjk 8½
¼3½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & /kkjk 482 & çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ dk vfHk[kaMu & U;k;ky; rc gh dk;Zokgh vfHk[kafMr dj ldrk gS tc v[kafMr vfHkdFkuksa ls dksbZ vijk/k fl) ugha gksrk gks & çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ ds ljy ikB ls ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd dksbZ laKs; vijk/k fl) ugha gksrk & vkosnu [kkfjtA ¼2015½ 11 ,llhlh 260] ¼2019½ 10 ,llhlh 337] ¼2018½ 5 ,llhlh 718] ¼2011½ 12 ,llhlh 319] ¼2019½ 13 ,llhlh 350] ¼2010½ 11 ,llhlh 226] ¼2019½ 10 ,llhlh 373] ¼2019½ 10 ,llhlh 686] nkafMd vihy Øekad 709 lu~ 2021 fu.khZr fnukad 30-6-2021] ¼2018½ 5 ,llhlh 678] ¼2014½ 15 ,llhlh 221] ¼2012½ 4 ,llhlh 547] ¼2010½ 5 ,llhlh 600] ¼2019½ 2 ,llhlh 336] ¼2012½ 9 ,llhlh 460] ¼2012½ 12 ,llhlh 437 rFkk ¼2009½ 9 ,llhlh 682 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 11½
¼4½ naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 498d & Øwjrk & fookfgr L=h dks Øwjrk ds dkj.k vius ek;ds esa jgus ds fy, foo'k djuk & Øwjrk dk fujarj pyus okyk vijk/k gSA ¼2019½ 5 ,llhlh 384 vuqlfjrA nkafMd iqujh{k.k Øekad 2376 lu~ 2020 fu.khZr fnukad 22-6-2021 ¼Xokfy;j½ voyafcrA ¼iSjk 12 ,oa 13½
¼5½ naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 498d 506 rFkk 34 & {ks=h; vf/kdkfjrk & çR;fFkZuh Øekad 2z ifjokfnuh Hkksiky esa fuokljr & efgyk Fkkuk] Hkksiky dks Hkh ekeys esa vUos"k.k djus dh {ks=h; vf/kdkfjrk gSA ¼iSjk 14½
¼6½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & /kkjk 482 & naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 498d 506 rFkk 34 & ngst çfr"ks/k vf/kfu;e] 1961 & /kkjk 3 rFkk 4 & çFke bfÙkyk fjiksVZ dk vfHk[kaMu & çR;fFkZuh Øekad 2 ifjokfnuh dk i{kdFku fd ngst dh ek¡x ds dkj.k mls u dsoy ekufld vkSj 'kkjhfjd :i ls rax fd;k x;k- cfYd nkEiR;x`g ls fudky Hkh fn;k x;k & vkosndx.k ds fo:) fofufnZ"V vfHkdFku & lk/kkj.k] loZxzkgh ;k vLi"V ugha dgs tk ldrs & gLr{ksi okaNuh; ughaA ¼2022½ 3 ,llhlh 93 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 7] 14 ,oa 15½
ORDER
1. This application under section 482 of CrPC has been filed seeking the following reliefs :--
“(i) To quash the impugned Chargesheet No. 01/2022 dated 4.11.2022 registered at Police Station-Mahila Thana, District Bhopal (M.P.) for the offence u/s 498-A, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 19\860 and section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and other consequential proceedings arising out of the said Chargesheet/Final Report bearing RCT No.14430/2022 pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhopal (M.P.)(EXHIBIT A/1) in the interest of justice.
(ii) To pass any other order which this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper, in the interest of justice.”
2. The undisputed facts are that the applicant No.1 is the motherin- law, applicant No. 2 is the father-in-law and applicant No.3 is the elder brother in-law of respondent No. 2. By this application, the applicants are seeking quashment of FIR, registered for offence under section 498-A, 506, 34 and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. According to the prosecution case, the respondent No.2 lodged an FIR on the allegations that on 25.11.2020 she got married to Hitesh Mehta as per Hindu rites and rituals. Immediately after her marriage, the applicants and husband of respondent No.2 started harassing her for want of dowry. They used to pass comments on every day. They were not keeping her properly in the matrimonial house. They were not providing food to her. Every day taunts were being passed on account of bringing no dowry. Her husband also used to quarrel with her on daily basis. Since she was in a private job, therefore, she was giving 50% of her salary to the in-laws, in spite of that the applicants and her elder brother in-law were demanding more money. They were insisting that she should bring Rs.7,00,000/- from her parents because less dowry has been given. They were also instigating her husband to demand a car and money. When she refused to accede to their demand, then she was tortured mentally by abusing as well as extending a threat to her life. Her mother-in-law also used to abuse her on daily basis. Even when she narrated the incident to her father, he also tried to convince them but they did not accept. The applicants are insisting that either the respondent No. 2 should bring Rs.7,00,000/- and a car, otherwise not only she will not be allowed to stay back in her matrimonial house but even they would remarry her husband i.e. Hitesh Mehta. Although she was bearing all the atrocities with an intention that one day the things would improve, but she has been turned out of her matrimonial house.
4. Challenging the FIR lodged by the respondent No.2, it is submitted by counsel for applicants that it is well established principle of law that unless and until there are specific allegations against the near and dear relatives of husband of the complainant, they should not be compelled to undergo the ordeal of the criminal trial. In fact the complainant was residing separately from the applicants. The office address of the complainant was changed from Bangalore to Mumbai and, therefore, she demanded that her husband should also shift to Mumbai after leaving his parents at Bangalore. Since her husband was working in Bangalore and did not want to leave his parents for the reason that applicant No.1 is a heart-patient and has undergone Angioplasty in past and his mother (applicant No.2) is a thyroid and Asthma patient and he himself is also suffering from Trigeminal Neuralgia. He also tried to make the complainant understand about the situation but she did not improve her behavior and ultimately the complainant has come back to Bhopal on 12.2.2022. The complainant is living in her parental home for the last 8 months without any rhyme or reason. The allegations leveled against them are false. The applicants are innocent persons. Even otherwise, all the major atrocities, if accepted, were committed at Bangalore and, therefore, FIR at Bhopal is misuse of legal proce
Specific allegations are essential for prosecuting relatives in dowry cases; vague claims do not suffice.
The judgment emphasizes the independence of civil and criminal proceedings, the absence of limitation bar, and the continuous nature of cruelty in dowry harassment cases.
The pendency of a civil proceeding does not automatically end a criminal proceeding, and specific allegations of harassment and demand of dowry warrant further investigation.
Allegations of mental harassment and interference by a mother-in-law do not constitute cruelty under IPC Section 498-A without evidence of willful conduct leading to grave injury or coercion.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the courts at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving the matrimonial home due to acts of cruelty would have jurisdiction to ente....
The need for specific allegations and caution against implicating distant relatives without specific material.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to establish specific allegations and the duty of the criminal courts while proceeding against relatives of the victim's husband in....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
