Wife Cannot Implicate Husband's Uncle In Cruelty Case To Pressurize Husband's Family To Return 'Stridhan': J&K High Court
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has deprecated the practice of arraying the relatives of the husband as accused in the proceedings under Section 498-A IPC to create pressure on the husband and his family members.The court held that no direct accusations were made against the petitioner's relative regarding acts of cruelty or cheating by him. The court added that it appears the petitioner...
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has deprecated the practice of arraying the relatives of the husband as accused in the proceedings under Section 498-A IPC to create pressure on the husband and his family members.
The court held that no direct accusations were made against the petitioner's relative regarding acts of cruelty or cheating by him. The court added that it appears the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused only because he was nominated by the other accused persons for handing over the jewelry/articles of the respondent wife, which are lying with her husband and her family members in the UK, as claimed by her.
Justice Rajnesh Oswal said that even in the complainant/wife's own statements, there was nothing incriminating against the petitioner, and he had been arraigned for the sole purpose of pressurizing him to persuade his sister, nephew, and brother-in-law to hand over the jewellery/articles to the complainant.
The court said that the role of the petitioner was only confined to the meetings wherein reconciliation was attempted between the respondent wife and her husband. The court said that there was no reference to the petitioner in the impugned FIR anywhere, except in the above reconciliatory meeting that took place in the United Kingdom.
The court said that considering such facts, it is clear that proceeding to continue the investigation would be nothing but an abuse of the process of law, particularly when there is no allegation against the petitioner for causing cruelty under Section 498-A of the IPC.
The court relied on Payal Sharma vs. State of Punjab (2024), which emphasized that false implications of relatives in matrimonial disputes should be discouraged and warned against the over-implication of distant relatives in cases of matrimonial cruelty.
BACKGROUND
The petitioner is a resident of Ludhiana and the maternal uncle of the husband accused, who was married to the complainant. When the relationship between the complainant and the husband/respondent failed, a reconciliation meeting was held in the UK, where the petitioner attempted to mediate but failed. Following this, the husband filed for divorce in the UK, which was granted. Subsequently, the wife/complainant lodged an FIR at Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, under Sections 498-A (cruelty by husband or relatives) and 420 IPC (cheating).
The complaint alleged that the petitioner instigated her in-laws, withheld her jewelry/stridhan, and influenced her husband to withdraw consent for IVF treatment. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated as he merely participated in the reconciliation meeting and was not directly involved in the marital disputes.
APPEARANCE:
Sachin Gupta, Advocate Ms. Arsha Sharma, Advocate For Petitioners
Pawan Dev Singh, Dy. AG
Mr. Pranav Kohli,
Sr. Advocate with Ms. Radhika Wahi, Advocate for Respondents
Case-title: Sumesh Chadha vs UT of J&K and Anr
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 99
