“Family Members Are Roped In Complaint Just To Harass Them”- Gujarat High Court Quashes FIR Against Mother-in-Law in 498A IPC Case

In a significant judgement Hon’ble Gujarat High court allowed the application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. and quashed the F.I.R. U/s 498(A), 323 and 114 IPC so far it was related with the applicant no. 3, who is a mother in law of the complaint and of 86 years of age at present. The Hon’ble court also remarks serious observations against blatant misuse of these provision to drag the family members who have no role in such cases.

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

The son of the applicants married the respondent no.2 on 28.2.2000 and thereafter, after some time, the applicants started demanding dowry and started to harass the complainant more and more. It is stated that due to illicit relation of her husband with one lady, the things went more worse and we started living separately from the in-laws i.e. the present applicants. It is stated that as the respondent no.2- complainant started opposing her husband about the illicit relation, he started beating the complainant. Thus, the impugned complaint was filed against her husband, in-laws i.e. the present applicants and the lady with whom, the husband of the complainant had alleged illicit relations. It is this FIR which is sought to be quashed in the application.

CONTENTION OF THE PARTIES

Learned counsel for the applicant stated that even from the papers of the chargesheet, no material which directly connects the present applicant in commission of alleged offence is found and therefore she prays to allow this application and quash the impugned FIR qua the present applicant, as it is nothing but abuse of process of law.

Learned counsel for the State and complaint however vehemently opposed the prayer.

HON’BLE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep N Bhatt observed that “Even looking to the age factor and the fact that general allegations are levelled in the FIR only to make sure that she is roped in the FIR, continuing these proceedings will amount to abuse of process of law and no fruitful purpose will be served in continuing the same.”

Hon’ble court then placed reliance on Bhajan Lal Vs. State of Haryana and Inder Mohan Goswami and Another versus State of Uttaranchal reported in (2007) 12 SCC 1 to explain the scope, extent and powers of high courts to exercise their inherent jurisdiction to quash such proceedings.

Hon’ble court further observed that “In view of above settled position of law and after considering the facts as alleged in the FIR and circumstances of the present case, it transpires that continuation of further proceedings pursuant to the said FIR will cause greater hardships to the applicant and no fruitful purpose would be served if such further proceedings are allowed to be continued. The Court must ensure that criminal prosecution is not used as instrument of harassment or for seeking private vendetta or with ulterior motive to pressurise accused or to settle the score.”

Further, before allowing the application and quashing the F.I.R. it was remarked that “At this stage, a mention is required to be made that the current scenario in the society is that Sections of 498A are being rampantly misused by the complainants and in such cases, all the family members are roped in the complaint only with a view to harass the family members and the Hon’ble Apex Court has taken cognizance of such incidents in number of judgments.”

Case Title:-  Jyantilal Vadilal Shah & another Vs. State of Gujarat

Case no. :-   R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 7061 of 2017

Order date :- 22.06.2023