2024 Supreme(SC) 1162

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.V. NAGARATHNA, NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH, JJ.
Dara Lakshmi Narayana and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of Telangana and Another – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. of 2024 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 16239 of 2024)
Decided On : 10-12-2024

IMPORTANT POINT
Section 498A of IPC (Section 85 of BNS) is often being misused and Court must guard against it – Making vague and generalised allegations during matrimonial conflicts, if not scrutinized, will lead to misuse of legal processes and encouragement for use of arm twisting tactics by a wife and/or her family – Sometimes, recourse is taken to invoke Section 498A of IPC against husband and his family in order to seek compliance with unreasonable demands of a wife.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 498A [Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Section 85] – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – Sections 3 and 4 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 [Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 528] – Cruelty – Alleged demand of dowry – Dismissal of quashing petition by High Court – Mere reference to names of family members in a criminal case arising out of a matrimonial dispute, without specific allegations indicating their active involvement should be nipped in bud – It is a well-recognised fact, borne out of judicial experience, that there is often a tendency to implicate all members of husband’s family when domestic disputes arise out of a matrimonial discord – Such generalised and sweeping accusations unsupported by concrete evidence or particularised allegations cannot form basis for criminal prosecution – Courts must exercise caution in such cases to prevent misuse of legal provisions and legal process and avoid unnecessary harassment of innocent family members – Here, FIR lacks concrete and precise allegations – FIR filed by respondent No. 2 is not a genuine complaint rather it is a retaliatory measure intended to settle scores with appellant No. 1 and his family members – Appellants who are members of family of husband, have been living in different cities, cannot be dragged into criminal prosecution and same would be abuse of process of law in absence of specific allegations made against each of them – Impugned order of High Court set aside and criminal proceedings against appellants quashed. (Paras 18, 21, 25 and 33)

(B) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 498A [Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Section 85] – Cruelty – Inclusion of Section 498A of IPC by way of an amendment was intended to curb cruelty inflicted on a woman by her husband and his family, ensuring swift intervention by State – However, in recent years, as there have been a notable rise in matrimonial disputes across the country, accompanied by growing discord and tension within institution of marriage, there has been a growing tendency to misuse provisions like Section 498A of IPC as a tool for unleashing personal vendetta against husband and his family by a wife – Making vague and generalised allegations during matrimonial conflicts, if not scrutinized, will lead to misuse of legal processes and encouragement for use of arm twisting tactics by a wife and/or her family – Sometimes, recourse is taken to invoke Section 498A of IPC against husband and his family in order to seek compliance with unreasonable demands of a wife – Supreme Court has, time and again, cautioned against prosecuting husband and his family in absence of a clear prima facie case against them – Insertion of said provision is meant mainly for protection of a woman who is subjected to cruelty in matrimonial home primarily due to unlawful demand for any property or valuable security in form of dowry – However, sometimes it is misused as in present case – Courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take pragmatic realties into consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases – Allegations of harassment by husband’s close relatives who had been living in different cities and never visited or rarely visited place where complainant resided would have an entirely different complexion – Allegations of complainant are required to be scrutinized with great care and circumspection. (Paras 28, 29 and 31)

Facts of the case:

Being aggrieved by order dated 16.02.2022 passed by High Court for State of Telangana in Criminal Petition No. 1479 of 2022 refusing to quash criminal proceedings in FIR registered under Sections 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 appellants have preferred this appeal.

Findings of Court:

High Court, in present case, erred in not exercising powers available to it under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and thereby failed to prevent abuse of Court’s process by continuing criminal prosecution against appellants.

Result : Appeal allowed. FIR quashed.