Criminal proceedings under dowry laws cannot be used as a retaliatory measure in marital disputes, especially when initial complaints lack allegations of dowry demands.

1. The husband of the complainant and his parents are before this Court challenging the proceedings initiated against them for offences under Section 498A of the IPC , read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

NC: 2024:KHC:25067 CRL.P No. 10161 of 2021 2. It is not in dispute that on 16.05.2019, the wedding took place between the complainant and the 1st accused.

3. It is also not in dispute that on 26.04.2021, the wife had lodged a complaint wherein she contended that she had come out of her matrimonial house about three months ago since her father was unwell, and that her husband and in-laws were visiting her now and then. She stated that on one day, when she went to her matrimonial house with her parents, her husband and her in-laws did not allow her to enter the house, following which she requested the police to summon and advise them accordingly. The police registered this complaint as a non- cognizable report.

4. On the very next day i.e., on 27.04.2021, the husband had, in turn, lodged a complaint with the police against the wife and his in-laws, contending that the wife and his in-laws were arriving at his house to create a scene, after which he requested the police to summon and advise them to not disturb him and his parents. In this NC: 2024:KHC:25067 CRL.P No. 10161 of 2021 complaint, he also sated that his wife’s behaviour was improper and that she was in the habit of threatening his parents that she would commit suicide and, despite bringing this to the notice of his in-laws, no action had been taken against her, as a consequence of which he had dropped his wife back to her parents’ house.

5. It may be pertinent to state here that in both these complaints, neither the husband nor the wife made any allegations about any dowry being demanded or paid. In fact, a reading of said complaints would indicate that there was a difference of opinion between the husband and the wife in various aspects, and that they were residing separately.

6. About three months thereafter, i.e., on 08/07/2021, the husband initiated proceedings for dissolution of their marriage in M.C.No.3165/2021 on the ground that he had been treated cruelly by his wife, and in the week immediately thereafter, on 15.07.2021, the wife lodged a complaint that her husband and the in-laws demanded NC: 2024:KHC:25067 CRL.P No. 10161 of 2021 dowry of Rs.25 lakhs in cash, 1 kg. of gold ornaments and 10 kgs of silver articles, and that after some negotiations, a dowry of Rs.10 lakhs, 400 gms. of gold ornaments and 2 kgs. of silver articles were agreed to be given. She has thereafter gone on to state that she was subjected to continuous harassment by her husband and the in-laws, and was thus constrained to approach the police. The police on the basis of this complaint registered the FIR.

7. During the course of investigation, the police have admittedly seized 24 gold articles and a cash of Rs.56,500/- and 29 silver articles, apart from several documents.

8. After investigation, a charge-sheet has been laid against the husband and the in-laws.

9. Aggrieved by said proceedings, the husband and his parents are before this Court.

10. In support of the arguments advanced, the following citations have also been produced before this Court:

NC: 2024:KHC:25067 CRL.P No. 10161 of 2021 a. Rajesh Sharma & Ors. v. State of U.P., (2018) 10 SCC 472 – the Supreme Court considered the judgment rendered in Arnesh Kumar1 vis-à-vis the provisions of Section 498-A of the IPC and the significant filing of frivolous petitions thereunder, to frame guidelines in that regard;

b. Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors., (2022) 6 SCC 599: the Supreme Court rendered findings on the absence of specific allegations against the accused therein and quashed the proceedings accordingly;

c. Abhishek Pandey @ Ramji Pandey & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors., Crl. Rev. No.521 of 2021: the High Court of Madhya Pradesh quashed the criminal proceedings under Section 498- A o