Relatives Of Husband Cannot Be Booked U/S 498A IPC Merely Because They Asked Wife To Tolerate His Cruel Behaviour: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court observed that relatives of a husband cannot be charged under Section 498A IPC merely for advising the wife to tolerate the husband's bad behaviour, who subjected her to cruelty.
The Court was hearing a Criminal Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash and set aside the First Information Report registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande observed, “Merely, remarks in the complaint about the supporting the accused No.1 while narrating some of the incidents would not perse amount to committing the offences which they have been alleged of. It would be unfair to continue the prosecution against the present Applicants for the conduct of the accused No.1, in which they have been unfortunately dragged.”
Advocate Misbah Solkar appeared for the Appellant and APP D. J. Haldankar appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
The Applicants are relatives of accused No. 1 who is the husband of respondent No. 2. They were named in the FIR in a case for offences under Sections 498-A and 376 of the IPC. It was alleged in the Complaint that after her marriage respondent No. 2 faced physical and mental abuse from her husband and in-laws which led to two miscarriages. Her husband also had extramarital affairs and forced her into unwanted physical relations. It was alleged that in-laws did not intervene and instead advised her to tolerate the abuse. The trial Court dismissed the charges against some accused but proceeded against others.
The Court noted that none of the statements of the witnesses support the allegations of ill-treatment and cruelty at the hands of the applicants.
The Court observed, “The allegations in the complaint are general and vague without specific examples of cruelty and harassment. The record and the statements do not support the allegations made against the present Applicants.”
After going through the chargesheet the Court noted that the statement of witnesses recorded does not in any way indicate the complicity of the present Applicants in the said offence.
While noting that along with the accused no.1, being his family members, the present Applicants have been dragged into litigation, the Court observed, “Presently there is a rising tendency by the litigants to drag the in-laws and near relatives in the offence registered under Section 498-A. This is also one of the examples of its kind.”
The Court mentioned the decision of the Supreme Court reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 759, in the case of Achin Gupta V/s. State of Haryana And Ors. where according to the Court the SC has requested the legislature to look into the issue of making changes in Section 498A of the IPC. The Court noted that the Judgment recorded that despite the observation made in the Judgment of Preeti Gupta And Anr. V/s. State of Jharkhand And Anr., reported in (2010) 7 SCC 667, necessary changes have not been made in Sections 85 and 86 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, which is the para-materia provision to the Section 498A of the IPC.
Accordingly, the Court quashed and set aside the FIR to the extent of the present Applicants.
Finally, the Court allowed the Criminal Application.
