The court emphasizes that family members should not be unreasonably implicated in dowry-related cases without specific allegations to avoid abuse of process.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 15-12-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2 The petitioner has preferred the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. / 528 BNSS for quashing of the order dated 19.07.2019 passed by the learned A.C.J.M.-XIII, Gopalganj in complaint case No.112 of 2017, Trial No.601 of 2025, whereby cognizance has been taken under Section 498A of the IPC.

3. The prosecution’s story, in brief, is that the complainant’s marriage was solemnized with one Manoj Rai in the year 2009, and from the said wedlock they were blessed with a girl child. Thereafter, her husband fell ill and underwent treatment, during which a huge amount of money was spent. Thereafter, the petitioner and in-laws started demanding a cash of rupees one lacs and for non-fulfillment of the demand, they subjected her to cruelty both mental and physical. The accused persons also ousted the complainant on 30.12.2016 from her matrimonial home. In the meantime, efforts were made between the parties to reconcile their strained matrimonial relationship but all went in vain, forcing the complainant/O.P. No.2 to file the present complaint petition in the year 2017.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioners is brother-in-law (bhaisur) of O.P. No.2. Learned counsel further submitted that the learned District Court before taking cognizance failed to consider that the offence as alleged is not against the society. He further submitted that even considering the offence as alleged, material available on record don’t disclose any criminal element and without considering this aspect, the order impugned becomes unsustainable in the eye of law. Learned counsel further submitted that marriage is a sacred ceremony but little matrimonial skirmish suddenly erupts into hatred but the same can be resolved, if the parties are given opportunity to ponder to reconcile their dispute outside the court.

5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State submitted that a chance be given to the parties for amicable settlement outside the court.

6. Heard the parties.

7. The law in respect of matrimonial dispute between husband and wife is well settled at the same time, the Apex Court recently in the case of Navneesh Aggarwal & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Anr. reported in 2025 INSC 963 has held that the family members of husband should not be roped unnecessarily and face vexatious criminal trial.

8. It is commonly seen in the society that the entire family members, as well as, relatives are made accused along with the husband to face criminal prosecution. The Apex Court has demarcated the manner in which the complaints are entertained by the learned District Court.

9. Recently also, the Apex Court in the case of Mange Ram Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.10817 of 2024), in paragraph nos. 25, 31 and 32 has reiterated that in cases, particularly, related to dowry, opportunity be given to the parties first to reconcile, which inter alia are as follows:-

“25. This Court, in Dara Lakshmi Narayana vs. State of Telangana , (2025) 3 SCC 735 , has made it clear that family members of the husband ought not to be unnecessarily roped into criminal proceedings arising out of matrimonial discord. The Court observed that it has become a recurring tendency to implicate every member of the husband’s family, irrespective of their role or actual involvement, merely because a dispute has arisen between the spouses. It was further held that where the allegations are bereft of specific particulars, and particularly where the relatives sought to be prosecuted are residing