Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Cal) 157

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CHAITALI CHATTERJEE DAS, J.
Mrigesh Kanti Nath & Ors. - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of West Bengal & Anr. – Respondent
CRR 4014 of 2023
Decided On : 09-04-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Sabyasachi Banerjee, Ld. Sr. Adv. Mr. Somenath Bhattacharjee, Adv. Ms. Pragya Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Kaustav Chatterjee, Adv.
For the Respondent: Ms. Debaleena Ganguly, Adv. Mr. Debasish Roy, Ld.P.P. Mr. Imran Ali, Adv. Mrs. Debjani Sahu, Adv.

The High Court may exercise inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash matrimonial criminal proceedings when allegations against relatives are vague, omnibus, unsupported by specific acts, and contradicted by objective record, effectively preventing the misuse of the legal system for harassment.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 498A, 406, 506 and 34 - Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Sections 3 and 4 - Quashing of criminal proceedings - Inherit power invoked by in-laws in a matrimonial dispute - Existence of omnibus and vague allegations without specific overt acts or descriptions of incidents - Accused were incapacitated by major medical surgeries during the alleged period - Counter-blast potential of the complaint observed due to prior litigation - High Court duty bound to look into attending circumstances beyond the complaint to prevent abuse of process - Inherent jurisdiction exercised to prevent miscarriage of justice. (Paras 9, 10, 15, 17, 21)

Facts of the case:
Criminal proceedings were initiated by a daughter-in-law against her husband and parents-in-law alleging mental and physical cruelty and dowry demands. The petitioners sought quashing of the proceedings, contending that the allegations were false, vague, and omnibus. They submitted evidence showing that the elderly parents-in-law were undergoing major surgeries and were incapacitated during the time frame of the alleged incidents. It was further asserted that multiple complaints had been filed against the complainant by the family prior to this incident, suggesting that the current proceeding was a counter-blast to avoid legal consequences of her actions.

Findings of Court:
The Court held that in matrimonial disputes, there is a recurring trend of roping in entire family members with generic allegations. The Court observed that the medical records clearly indicated the physical inability of the elderly relatives to have committed the alleged physical assaults. Furthermore, the complaint lacked specific descriptions of overt acts, dates, or particular incidents regarding the petitioners' involvement. Consequently, the court found the proceedings to be an abuse of the judicial process.

Issues: Whether the criminal proceedings against the relatives of the husband constitute an abuse of the process of law and whether the inherent powers should be exercised to quash the charge sheet due to lack of specific allegations and medical impossibility.

Ratio Decidendi: The inherent power of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings is meant to prevent the abuse of process and secure the ends of justice. Where allegations in a matrimonial dispute are omnibus, clearly inconsistent with medical evidence of incapacitation, and appear to be a retaliatory measure rather than a bona fide complaint, such proceedings must be quashed to prevent unnecessary harassment of the accused.

Result: Application allowed. The entire proceeding pending before the Magistrate is quashed qua the petitioners.

Table of Content
1. overview of procedural history and factual matrix of the criminal complaint. (Para 1 , 2)
2. summary of rival contentions and arguments submitted by respective parties. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. court's evaluation of evidence and assessment of allegations against established case law. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. legal precedents establishing the criteria for exercising jurisdiction under section 482 cr.p.c. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
5. final analysis, decision, and order regarding the quashing of criminal proceedings. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)

JUDGMENT :

CHAITALI CHATTERJEE DAS, J.

1. This provisional application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the entire proceeding being ACGR 5383/2022 arising out of Jadavpur Police Station case no. 245/22 dated 1.12.2022, under Section 498A, 406, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, read with Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act now pending before the court of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 24 Parganas South at Alipore and the Charchit no. 248 of 2022 dated 21.12.2022, and all orders passed in connection with the proceeding now pending before the learned additional chief judicial magistrate 24 Parganas South at Alipore.

Factual Matrix of the case

2. Bereft of any details the case of the petitioner is that a complaint was lodged by one Jyothi Bala Nath/Opposite Party no. 2, before the Jadavpur Police Station against the petitioner and three others for commission of the alleged offences punishable under Section 498A IPC read with section 3 and 4 of the dowry prohibition Act, 1961. The allegations levelled against the present petitioner is that the marriage was held on March 2022 and the present petitioners being the husband and in-laws of the de facto complainant in furtherance of their common intention, subjected her to physical and mental torture as well as to misappropriate her Stridhan articles and intimidated her. From the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C the Stridhan articles were seized and handed over to the defacto complainant upon furnishing. Zimmanama. The investigating authority submitted the charge sheet only against the petitioners for commission of the offences as and no charge could be established against three other accused persons and they were excluded from the charge sheet.

Submissions

3. The learned Senior Counsel Mr. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya argued that on true and proper appreciation of the materials collected during investigation would reveal that the Opposite Party no. 2 lodged the complaint against the petitioners, which never reflect any of the ingredients necessary to attract the charges, levelled against them. Astoundingly, the investigating officer accepted the version of the Opposite Party no. 2 as sacrosanct without making any endeavour to unearth the truth. It is further submitted that the accused petitioner number2 is the father-in-law age about 67 years old and underwent an open heart bypass surgery on August 6, 2022 and had four coronary artery bypass grafting procedures at Rabindranath Tagore Hospital and discharged on August 15, 2022. Additionally, petitioner no. 3, the 61 year old mother-in- law of the complainant, underwent a knee replacement surgery on May 2, 2022 at Health point Hospital and was hospitalised in critical condition from May 10, 2022 to May 18, 2022. These facts were omitted in the complaint lodged by the O.P. number 2 in order to suppress that under the aforesaid circumstances, it was absolutely not possible for these two persons to physically assault her. These facts abundantly makes it clear that the complainant narrative as presented in her letter of complaint lacks of semblance of truth and lodged with ulterior motive to harass the present petitioners. It is further submitted that the charges are baseless and failed to establish any wrongdoing under the specified sections and if the proceeding is allowed to continue