Allegations Of Ill-Treatment By Man Against His Family Members Cannot Come U/S 498A IPC: Bombay High Court
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has held that allegations of ill-treatment made by a man against his own family members will not fall within the ambit of section 498A (domestic violence) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Dr Neela Gokhale noted that in the instant case, the First Information Report (FIR) was lodged by a woman along with...
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has held that allegations of ill-treatment made by a man against his own family members will not fall within the ambit of section 498A (domestic violence) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Dr Neela Gokhale noted that in the instant case, the First Information Report (FIR) was lodged by a woman along with her husband, against her in-laws.
"A plain but careful reading of the FIR and the charge sheet indicates that the allegations against the Petitioners are quite general and vague. Undoubtedly, she has given a list of incidents of cruelty in the FIR, however, the instances are also of a nature that do not fulfill the ingredients of Section 498(A) of the IPC. Moreover, the allegations are made only against the husband's relatives. In fact, some of the ill-treatment as alleged is aimed against her husband and not even the complainant herself. Allegations of ill-treatment by a man against his own family members do not fall within the scope and ambit of Section 498(A) of the IPC," the bench held in the July 18 judgment.
The bench was hearing a plea filed by five persons of a family seeking to quash a March 2013 FIR lodged against them by their brother and his wife, alleging cruelty and domestic violence. The wife, who was the first complainant in the impugned FIR had made various allegations against the husband's family like ill-treating her and her husband, beating the couple, disallowing her to use kitchen, restricting house help from doing her chores etc.
The bench noted that "history" of civil litigation between the complainant wife and her husband on one side and the in-laws on the other.
"This lays bare the intention of the complainant in making the complaint. It demonstrates his personal interest in settling scores with his family members in respect of the family property. All the litigations involve property disputes. The FIR clearly discloses a proxy litigation engaged by the husband through his wife, the complainant against the Petitioners to settle his own property dispute," the judges said.
The judges further noted from the material on record that in most of the cases, the major challenge made by the husband is to the gift deed of a property of his deceased father.
"The FIR is nothing but a shot fired by the husband from his wife's shoulder to espouse his own cause of his interest in his father's property. It is evident from the attending circumstances in the case that the entire law enforcement machinery has been set in motion by the complainant only at her husband's behest. This is so because all the parties are yet residing together in their family home. We thus have no hesitation in holding that the FIR is filed with an ulterior motive for wreaking personal vengeance on the Petitioners," the bench opined.
Further, the bench held that the continuation of this FIR would be a complete abuse of the process of the law.
"The police machinery has been used for realizing private interest of the complainant and her husband. The present case is a classic example of gross abuse of Section 498(A) of the IPC. Thus, we are inclined to quash the FIR," the judges said while quashing the FIR.
Appearance:
Advocate Ashish Mishra appeared for the Petitioners.
Assistant Public Prosecutor Anand Shalgaonkar responded the State.
Case Title: Darshan Kumar Vilayatiram Khanna vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Writ Petition 2982 of 2015)