Courts Must Be Pragmatic In Criminal Cases Arising From Matrimonial Disputes, Tendency To Implicate Husband & His Relatives Not Uncommon: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court has held that since it is not uncommon for a husband and his family members to be implicated in criminal cases arising out of a matrimonial dispute, the courts adjudicating on such matters shall take into account pragmatic realities.

Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta held: The tendency to implicate the husband and all his immediate relatives is also not uncommon. Even after conclusion of criminal trial, it is often difficult to ascertain the real truth. The Courts have to be extremely careful and cautious while dealing with these complaints and should take pragmatic realities into considerations while handling criminal case base on matrimonial dispute.

The brief facts of the case of are that both petitioners, who were sisters of the accused husband were consistently and continuously residing separately at completely separate residences and are in no way connected with the daily affairs of the matrimonial home of the opposite party no. 2.

The marriage of opposite party no. 2 was solemnized on 05.05.2009 with the brother of the petitioners, Amit Paul, in accordance with Hindu Rites and Customs. She began residing with her husband at the matrimonial home and later lodged a completely false and frivolous written complaint on 27.09.2021 against the married sisters-in-law and two others.

It was stated that both the petitioners were entirely innocent and they have been implicated solely to harass them. Due to matrimonial discord, the opposite party no. 2 was taken to her parental house by the family members of the opposite party no. 2 on 16.09.2021 and now she is residing at her parental home with her daughter.

It was argued that though, no roles were ever played or interfered with either by the petitioner no. 1 or by the petitioner no. 2 in their matrimonial dispute,  they have been implicated falsely.

Court found that the opposite party no. 2 made an allegation that since after marriage, her husband demanded her to bring money from her father since her father had not given sufficient articles or dowry at the time of marriage and whenever she raised objection, her mother-in-law and other in-laws supported her husband who, in turn, tortured her both mentally and physically.

She further stated her husband and other in-laws inflicted tortures that increased day by day. However, no specific role was attributed to the married sisters-in-law, who are the petitioners. The allegations are, therefore, general and omnibus in the written complaint, the court said.

It is also an admitted fact that she is residing separately at her parental house with her daughter on and from 16.09.2021. She lodged the complaint on 27.09.2021 after almost 12 years of her marriage against the petitioners whose matrimonial homes were situated far away from the matrimonial home of the opposite party no. 2.

Upon perusal of the statement recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC of the complainant, it reveals she alleged that the sisters-in-law had threatened opposite party no. 2 over phone. But, no specific date, time or mobile number was mentioned in the written complaint or in her statement.

This creates a situation where it is impossible to ascertain the role played by each accused in furtherance of the offence. Therefore, the allegations are found general and omnibus and can, at best, be said to have been made only to implicate the petitioners, the court said.

Accordingly, it quashed the case the petitioners.

Case: X v Y

Case No: CRR 76 of 2023