Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court recently quashed criminal proceedings with regards to dowry harassment against the family members of a former husband, initiated three years after the divorce, finding that they have unnecessarily been roped in the complaint without there being any specific allegation against them.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra noted that the complaint by woman was largely devoted to the ill-treatment committed by the husband and the sole reference of the family members was made for an incident that happened on August 16, 2015.

"However, by that time, the ex-parte decree of divorce has already been passed and the appellants being the relatives of the husband cannot be proceeded against under the law. In such a view of the matter, we are of the considered view that allowing the trial to proceed against the appellants shall amount to vexatious trial only for the reason that they are relatives of the husband," the bench said.

The bench relied upon Geeta Mehrotra & Anr v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr (2012) which has deprecated the practice of involving the relatives of the husband for the offence under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

"Except for the bald statement against the appellants, the other allegations are against the husband. There is absolutely no reason or justification as to why the appellants would try for a reconciliation by visiting the house of the complainant on August 16, 2015 when the divorce has already taken place by order of May 31, 2012," the bench further added.

Brief Background

The appellants were aggrieved with Allahabad the High Court's order which had disposed of their plea for quashing of the summoning order of April 23, 2018 issued by the Trial Court in complaint case under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, without deciding the quashing petition on merits.

In the case at hand, Kumar Saurabh was the husband of Smt Charusmita and the appellants were his relatives. The appellant no.1 - Sushila is the mother, appellant no. 2- Shailendra Dablu is the elder brother, appellant no. 3- Seema is the sister-in-law, appellant no. 4- Kulshreshtha Upadhyay is the elder brother and appellant no. 5 – Kanak is his sister.  

Kumar Saurabh and Charusmita were married on June 17, 2010. After the marriage, they lived in Kota (Rajasthan) for a brief period before she left the matrimonial home in October, 2010 taking away all her possessions including stridhan and started living with her parents. 

As effort made by Kumar Saurabh to bring back his wife to resume matrimonial life was not successful, compelling him to prefer a divorce petition in the court of Family Judge, Kota, Rajasthan.

The wife failed to appear before the Family Court despite receiving notice resulting in an ex-parte divorce decree on May 31, 2012. 

After about three years from the date of passing of the divorce decree, the ex wife moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar for registration of a criminal case and making investigation.

The said application was treated as a complaint case wherein after recording her statement and other witnesses, the Magistrate issued summoning order on April 23, 2018 against the appellants under Section 498A IPC.

The appellants approached the High Court by filing a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing the summoning order which was dismissed by the impugned order.

"Even if such an incident has happened on August 16, 2015, the fact remains that on the said date the relationship of husband and wife has already come to an end as such the appellants being relatives of the husband cannot be proceeded for offence under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961", the bench significantly pointed out.     

Case Title: Sushila v. State of Uttar Pradesh