Match-Maker Cannot Be Charged With Cheating If Groom Allegedly Illtreated Bride: Bombay High Court
A match-maker, who praised the groom before the prospective bride’s family, cannot be charged with cheating merely because the man allegedly treated the woman badly and is now accused of domestic violence, the Bombay High court observed.A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan quashed the FIR against the matchmaker, a senior banker, booked along with the husband...
A match-maker, who praised the groom before the prospective bride’s family, cannot be charged with cheating merely because the man allegedly treated the woman badly and is now accused of domestic violence, the Bombay High court observed.
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan quashed the FIR against the matchmaker, a senior banker, booked along with the husband and his family.
“This is nothing but an abuse of process of law by the Investigating Officer which cannot be countenanced …The allegations made in the FIR and the final report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C., even if, taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the applicant,” the bench observed.
The court heard the petition filed by a Shailendra Kumar Dubey, employed as an Assistant General Manager, for Bank of India in West Bengal, for quashing the FIR registered against him in 2019. Dubey, along with others, was booked in the case registered under 376, 377, 498A, 354, 506(2), 420, 406, r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
In her complaint, the woman said their marriage was solemnized in 2018 at Hotel Lalit in Goa. However, soon after the marriage she was subjected to physical and mental cruelty as well as dowry demands, she claimed.
In the supplementary statement to the police, she alleged that Dubey cheated them by exploiting her father sentimentally, praising her husband and in-laws and saying that they are decent, cultured and refined and that the boy has also a very good job in a foreign country.
“This, in our view, cannot be said to be the offences, even remotely, attracting ingredients of Sections 406 or 420 of the Indian Penal Code,” the bench observed.
“As a matter of fact, it appears that the petitioner, in good faith, acted as a mediator for fixing the marriage of the respondent no.1 (wife) with the accused… providing the contact details of both parties to each other. He is in no way related with any of the parties,” the bench added.
The court cited the State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors wherein guidelines have been laid for quashing of FIR, and said it is a fit case to invoke jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Shailendra Kumar Dubey Vs State of Maharashtra [CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 5296 OF 2021]
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 93
Appearances - Ms. Jasmin Purani i/b Mr. Rahul Agrawal for the petitioner
Mrs. P.P. Shinde, APP for the State