MISUSE OF SECTION 498A OF I P C ACT TO SETTLE PERSONAL SCORES AGAINST THE HUSBAND AND HIS RELATIVES.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 195 OF 2022, (arising out of S.L.P (Crl.) No. 6545 OF 2020) KAHKASHAN KAUSAR @ SONAM & ORS. … APPELLANT (S)VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. … RESPONDENT(S)JUDGMENT
KRISHNA MURARI, J.
08TH FEBRUARY, 2022
QUESTION:
11. Whether allegations made against the in-laws Appellants are in the nature of general omnibus allegations and therefore liable to be quashed?
ANSWER:
22. Therefore, upon consideration of the relevant circumstances and in the absence of any specific role attributed to the accused appellants, it would be unjust if the Appellants are forced to go through the tribulations of a trial, i.e., general and omnibus allegations cannot manifest in a situation where the relatives of the complainant’s husband are forced to undergo trial. It has been highlighted by this court in varied instances, that a criminal trial leading to an eventual acquittal also inflicts severe scars upon the accused, and such an exercise must therefore be discouraged.
23. In view of the above facts and discussions, the impugned order dated 13.11.2019 passed by the High Court of Patna is set aside. Theimpugned F.I.R. No. 248 of 2019 against the Appellants under Sections341, 323, 379, 354, 498A read with Section 34 IPC stands quashed.
24. As a result, appeal stands allowed.
....…..........................J.
(S. ABDUL NAZEER)
…................................J.
(KRISHNA MURARI)
NEW DELHI;
08TH FEBRUARY, 2022
{CITATION 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 141}
Recently Hon’ble Apex Court has given a judgement wherein issue related to matrimonial disputes were raised before the court. The allegations have been made by complainant against husband and inlaws as usually happens in these kinds of matrimonial disputes. First dispute happened but resolved between party. The lady came at home then another dispute arose between party. The complainant filed complaint against husband, niece, MIL, BIL and SIL. They filed writ before Hon’ble Patna high court but got dismissed.Then, party went before Hon’ble Apex Court. Question was raised and answer was given as per above.
In the course of proceeding, Hon’ble Apex Court had gathered various passed judgements hereinbelow statedthey have put lights on these kinds of matrimonial litigations. How these matters are becoming tools of harassment to settle personal scores against the husband and his relatives. The Apex Court by way of its judgments has warned the courts from proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against them.Further, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law.Let us have look some of the decisions.
KAHKASHAN KAUSAR @ SONAM & ORS. VERSUSSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
{2022 LiveLaw (SC) 141}
12. Before we delve into greater detail on the nature and content ofallegations made, it becomes pertinent to mention that incorporation ofsection 498A of IPC was aimed at preventing cruelty committed upon awoman by her husband and her in-laws, by facilitating rapid stateintervention. However, it is equally true, that in recent times, matrimoniallitigation in the country has also increased significantly and there is a greater disaffection and friction surrounding the institution of marriage,now, more than ever. This has resulted in an increased tendency toemploy provisions such as 498A IPC as instruments to settle personalscores against the husband and his relatives.
13. This Court in its judgment in Rajesh Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of
U.P. & Anr.(2018) 10 SCC 472, has observed:-
“14. Section 498-A was inserted in the statute with the laudable object of punishing cruelty at the hands of husband or his relatives against a wife particularly when such cruelty had potential to result in suicide or murder of a woman as mentioned in the statement of Objects and Reasons of the Act 46 of 1983. The expression 'cruelty' in Section 498A covers conduct which may drive the woman to commit suicide or cause grave injury (mental or physical) or danger to life or harassment with a view to coerce her to meet unlawful demand. It is a matter of serious concern that large number of cases continue to be filed under already referred to some of the statistics from the Crime Records Bureau. This Court had earlier noticed the fact that most of such complaints are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues. Many of such complaints are not bona fide. At the time of filing of the complaint, implications and consequences are not visualized. At times such complaints lead to uncalled for harassment not only to the accused but also to the complainant. Uncalled for arrest may ruin the chances of settlement.”
14. Previously, in the landmark judgment of this court in Arnesh
Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr.(2014) 8 SCC 273, it was also observed:-
“4. There is a phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years. The institution of marriage is greatly revered in this country. Section 498-A IPC was introduced with avowed object to combat the menace of harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband and his relatives. The fact that Section 498-A IPC is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bed- ridden grandfathers and grand-mothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested.”
15. Further in Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr. (2010) 7 SCC 667, ithas also been observed:-
“32. It is a matter of common experience that most of these complaints under section 498A IPC are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations. We come across a large number of such complaints which are not even bona fide and are filed with oblique motive. At the same time, rapid increase in the number of genuine cases of dowry harassment are also a matter of serious concern. 33. The learned members of the Bar have enormous social responsibility and obligation to ensure that the social fiber of family life is not ruined or demolished. They must ensure that exaggerated versions of small incidents should not be reflected in the criminal complaints. Majority of the complaints are filed either on their advice or with theirconcurrence. The learned members of the Bar who belong to a noble profession must maintain its noble traditions and should treat every complaint under section 498A as a basic human problem and must make serious endeavour to help the parties in arriving at an amicable resolution of that human problem. They must discharge their duties to the best of their abilities to ensure that social fiber, peace and tranquility of the society remains intact. The members of the Bar should also ensure that one complaint should not lead to multiple cases. 34. Unfortunately, at the time of filing of the complaint the implications and consequences are not properly visualized by the complainant that such complaint can lead to insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the complainant, accused and his close relations. 35. The ultimate object of justice is to find out the truth and punish the guilty and protect the innocent. To find out the truth is a herculean task in majority of these complaints. The tendency of implicating husband and all his immediate relations is also not uncommon. At times, even after the conclusion of criminal trial, it is difficult to ascertain the real truth. The courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases. The allegations of harassment of husband's close relations who had been living in different cities and never visited or rarely visited the place where the complainant resided would have an entirely different complexion. The allegations of the complaint are required to be scrutinized with great care and circumspection. 36. Experience reveals that long and protracted criminal trials lead to rancour, acrimony and bitterness in the relationship amongst the parties. It is also a matter of common knowledge that in cases filed by the complainant if the husband or the husband's relations had to remain in jail even for a few days, it would ruin the chances of amicable settlement altogether. The process of suffering is extremely long and painful.”
16. In Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of UP & Anr.(2012) 10 SCC 741, it was observed:-
“21. It would be relevant at this stage to take note of an apt observation of this Court recorded in the matter of G.V. Rao vs. L.H.V. Prasad & Ors. reported in (2000) 3 SCC 693 wherein also in a matrimonial dispute, this Court had held that the High Court should have quashed the complaint arising out of a matrimonial dispute wherein all family members had been roped into the matrimonial litigation which was quashed and set aside. Their Lordships observed therein with which we entirely agree that: “there has been an outburst of matrimonial dispute in recent times. Marriage is a sacred ceremony, main purpose of which is to enable the young couple to settle down in life and live peacefully. But little matrimonial skirmishes suddenly erupt which often assume serious proportions resulting in heinous crimes in which elders of the family are also involved with the result that those who could have counselled and brought about rapprochement are rendered helpless on their being arrayed as accused in the criminal case. There are many reasons which need not be mentioned here for not encouraging matrimonial litigation so that the parties may ponder over their defaults and terminate the disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of fighting it out in a court of law where it takes years and years to conclude and in that process the parties lose their “young” days in chasing their cases in different courts.” The view taken by the judges in this matter was that the courts would not encourage such disputes.”
17. Recently, in K. Subba Rao v. The State of Telangana(2018) 14 SCC 452, it was alsoobserved that:-
“6. The Courts should be careful in proceeding against the distant relatives in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths. The relatives of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime are made out.”
Apex Court said in para 18. The above-mentioned decisions clearly demonstrate that this court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse of section 498A IPC and the increased tendency of implicating relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes, without analysing the long term ramifications of a trial on the complainant as well as the accused. It is further manifest from the said judgments that false implication by way of general omnibus allegations made in the course of matrimonial dispute, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law. Therefore, this court by way of its judgments has warned the courts from proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against them.
Para 7 ………..Reliance is placed on SocialAction Forum for Manav Adhikar & Anr. Vs. Union of India, Ministry ofLaw And Justice & Ors.(2018) 10 SCC 443, wherein it was observed:-
“4. Regarding the constitutionality of Section 498-A IPC, in Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India and others , it was held by the Supreme Court:- "Provision of S. 498A of Penal Code is not unconstitutional and ultra vires. Mere possibility of abuse of a provision of law does not per se invalidate a legislation. Hence plea that S. 498A has no legal or constitutional foundation is not tenable. The object of the provisions is prevention of the dowry menace. But many instances have come to light where the complaints are not bona fide and have been filed with oblique motive. In such cases acquittal of the accused does not in all cases wipe out the ignominy suffered during and prior to trial. Sometimes adverse media coverage adds to the misery. The question, therefore, is what remedial measures can be taken to prevent abuse of the well-intentioned provision. Merely because the provision is constitutional and intra vires, does not give a licence to unscrupulous persons to wreck personal vendetta or unleash harassment. It may, therefore, become necessary for the legislature to find out ways how the makers of frivolous complaints or allegations can be appropriately dealt with. Till then the Courts have to take care of the situation within the existing frame-work.”
….
Editor :
Above judgement Social Action Forum referring Sushil Kumar Sharma noted that the legislature to find out ways how the makers of frivolous complaints or allegations can be appropriately dealt with till date what has been done in this regard by the legislature it is totally unknown. Most, they could have done by way of
- Making neutral investigation but unfortunately nothing has been done.
- Neither this provision is made none bailable offence which could have saved various accused from harassing dilemma. However, Arnesh kumar judgement saved various accused.
- Being police state matter, states have attempted to reconcile the matter before filing FIR.
- However, once in case of Rajesh Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.(2018) Court did wonderful attempt to change it by way of introducing a committee of senior citizen who would check complaints before filing FIR but unfortunately, that was overturned by lager bench saying that CRPC does not permit so. Ever then also, legislature did nothing to change the same. They could have changed the CRPC by way of incorporating those suggestions in the CRPC.
Connect : https://phoolgadi.wordpress.com/ Visit : https://groups.google.com/d/forum/phoolgadiindia
The contents of this document are solely for information purpose. It does not constitute any legal or non-legal advice or medical/non-medical advice or recommendation on any topic. While due care has been taken in preparing this document, the existence of mistakes and omissions herein is not ruled out. Neither editor/writer nor team of editors nor PHOOLGADI INDIA accepts any liabilities neither for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any inaccurate or incomplete information in this document nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Please take due care and take appropriate legal advice before taking any action by putting reliance on this book/article. Please refer laws applicable & Case-laws mentioned for better understanding of the matter.
WordPress.com
