Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 20380
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J
VINABEN PREMSINH JADON – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/SCR.A/3169/2024
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR
Act Referred
Dowry Prohibition Act : S.4
Code of Criminal Procedure : S.482
Constitution of India : Article 226
Headnote
(B) FIR - Nature of allegations - General and vague allegations in matrimonial disputes do not warrant criminal proceedings against relatives residing separately from the complainant. (Paras 2)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, relatives of the husband, sought to quash an FIR filed by the wife alleging offences under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act, with the husband not contesting the petition. The marriage took place in 2016, and the couple had been living separately since January 2023.
Findings of Court:
The court found the allegations against the petitioners to be vague and general, warranting further consideration of the matter.
Issues: The main issue was whether the vague allegations in a matrimonial dispute justified the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners who resided separately from the complainant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that vague allegations in matrimonial disputes do not justify criminal proceedings against relatives who are not directly involved, emphasizing the need for specificity in such cases.
Result: Petition disposed of as not pressed for one petitioner; matter requires consideration for others.
By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside the FIR being CR No.11821003240005 of 2024 dated 07.02.2024 registered with Mahila Police Station, District Dahod for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
At the outset, learned advocate for the petitioners does not press the present petition qua petitioner No.4 – Devendrasinh Premsinh Jadon (husband). Hence, present petition is disposed of as not pressed qua petitioner No.4 (husband).
Heard learned advocate Ms. Nidhi Barot for the petitioners and learned APP for respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat. Learned advocate for the petitioners has submitted that petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 3 are mother-in-law, father-in-law and aunt-in-law (Masi Sasu) respectively of the respondent No.2 herein. The impugned FIR is filed by respondent No.2 for matrimonial dispute that took place on 07.02.2024 wherein it is alleged that marriage of respondent No.2 got solemnized with petitioner No.4 on 29.01.2016 and she resided with accused No.1 (husband) at Ambaji for a limited period and then they shifted and started residing separately since 15.01.2023. Considering the fact that impugned FIR is filed for a matrimonial dispute between husband and wife and petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 3 though were residing separately from respondent No.2 still are implicated in the offence and the fact that the allegations are general and vague in nature, matter requires consideration.
RULE returnable on 20.06.2024. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 to be served through the concerned police station.
In the meantime, there shall be Ad-interim Relief in terms of paragraph No.7(B) of the petition. Direct service is permitted.
