In-Laws Who Tortured Daughter-In-Law Cannot Walk Away Scot-Free Even If Charge For Demanding Dowry Is Dropped In Chargesheet: Karnataka HC
Mustafa Plumber
13 March 2025 9:30 AM
The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a criminal case against the in-laws of a woman who had tortured her.
Justice M Nagaprasanna dismissed the petition filed by H Sanna Devanna and Shivagangamma who are charged under sections 504, 506, 498A, 323, 324 R/W 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
He said “There are pointed instances of torture meted out against the complainant. She has been assaulted by pulling her hair by both accused Nos.2 and 3, the petitioners herein. There are eye witnesses to the incident. The charge sheet depicts the screaming of the daughter-in-law, heard by a neighbor, who had come to her rescue. This being the observation in the summary of the charge sheet, merely because the offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act is dropped, it would not mean that mother-in-law and father-in-law, who have tortured the daughter-in-law, could walk away scot-free.”
The petitioner, seeking quashing of the offence after filing of the chargesheet contended that offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act have been dropped. Thus, when there is no demand of dowry, Section 498A of the IPC cannot be alleged against the petitioners, in particular.
Moreover, it was argued that all allegations are against the husband the and mother-in-law and father-in-law do not stay with the couple but were unnecessarily dragged into the web of crime.
The complainant opposed the petition, submitting that she has been tortured by the accused and, therefore, it is a matter of trial for them to come out clean. Merely because the offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act have been dropped, it does not mean that the present offences as afore quoted are not met.
Findings:
Referring to an Apex court judgment, the court held, “The summary of the charge sheet, as quoted hereinabove, discloses cruelty in the case at hand by both the petitioners – mother-in-law and father-in-law is clearly met.”
Further, it opined “There are scores and scores of cases where offence under Section 498A of the IPC is misused. Merely because there is misuse of the said provision, that does not mean in cases where there is real torture can be brushed aside. The case at hand is one such illustration.”
Accordingly, it dismissed the petition.
Appearance: Advocate B.C Jnanayya Swami for Petitioner.
AGA Sharad V Magadum for R1.
Advocate L.T Mantagani for R2.
Citation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 101
Case Title: H Sanna Devanna & ANR AND State of Karnataka & ANR
Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.103553 OF 2023