Taking a serious view of the trend of false implication of the relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes, the High Court observed that, the false implication of the relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes based on general and omnibus allegations, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law.

With this, the court ordered to quash further proceedings against the mother-in-law/A2, brother-in-law/A3 (husband's brother), and sister-in-law/A4 (wife of husband's brother) of a woman, who had leveled allegations of harassing her for dowry [booked u/s 498-A IPC and S. 3, 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act].

The brother-in-law (A3) was further accused of molesting her and therefore, he was booked under section 354 IPC as well. It was alleged that he had expressed sympathy towards her and took her forcibly in his lap and tried to caress her and when she resisted and tried to run away, A-3 and A-4 also came there and all of them gagged her mouth and mercilessly beat her.

Thus, all three moved to the High Court seeking to quash the entire criminal proceedings.

Court's observations

Perusing the FIR and charge sheet and other records of the case, the Court noted that the main allegations were made by the wife/complainant against her husband (A-1) for the alleged offences under Sections 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

The Court further noted that the other family members i.e. A-2 and A-4 who are mother and sister-in-law of A-1 were implicated by way of general and omnibus allegations and that there were no specific and distinct allegations against them.

Regarding the allegations of molestation against A3 (brother of the husband), the court noted that the only allegation against him was that he had expressed his sympathy towards the complainant and had caught hold her hand.

"She resisted the alleged incident that occurred prior to 28.02.2007. If at all there is truth in the allegations of the second respondent, so far as A-3 is concerned, she being a software Engineer would not have kept quite without taking any recourse from 12.06.2007 on which date the second respondent was alleged to have molested by the petitioner/A-3," the Court said as it prima facie observed that the allegations did not make out or satisfy the essential ingredients of offence under Section 354 IPC.

Consequently, noting that the relatives of A-1 i.e. A-2 to A-4 had been roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations and without any specific instances of their involvement in the alleged offences, the Court said that criminal proceedings deserved to be quashed to avoid the rigor of undergoing trial.

The Court, therefore, considered it a fit case to invoke the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., and quash further proceedings against the petitioners/A-2 to A-4.