HIGH COURT OBSERVATION ON MISUSE OF SECTION 498A IPC

In a very recent case, the Hon’ble High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi In Cr.M.P. No. 2758 of 2016 titled Krishnanand Mishra & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr, while quashing the entire proceeding related to the offence of 498A/120B IPC r/w section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the Hon’ble High has observed in the said judgment that admittedly, petitioner nos.1 and 2 are residing separately at Ghutuwa, Ramgarh and they are brother-in-law (Nandoi) and sister-in-law (Nanad) of the informant. What is the mode of torture, that has not been disclosed in the FIR, and how they have tortured the informant that has also not been disclosed. Further, the Court finds that earlier the case was lodged, in which, after investigation final form was submitted on 17.03.2016 whereby the petitioners were not sent up for trial and the present case has been filed. It appears that the petitioners, who happened to be relatives and residing at different places, have been maliciously accused in the present case.

Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code was inserted in the statute with a pious view for punishing the cruelty of the husband, however, nowadays, the said section is being misused which has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar & another; [(2014) 8 SCC 273. How the cases are lodged under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code in the heat of the moment, that was considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Preeti Gupta & another v. State of Jharkhand & another; [(2010) 7 SCC 667]. Paragraphs 32, 33, 34, 35, and 36 of the said judgment are quoted herein below: It is a matter of common experience that most of these complaints under Section 498-A 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 motives. At the same time, the rapid increase in the number of genuine cases of dowry harassment is also a matter of serious concern. 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. The majority of the complaints are filed either on their advice or with their concurrence. The learned members of the Bar who belong to a noble profession must maintain its noble traditions and should treat every complaint under Section 498-A as a basic human problem and must make a serious endeavor 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 the social fiber, peace, and tranquillity of the society remain intact. The members of the Bar should also ensure that one complaint does not lead to multiple cases. Unfortunately, at the time of filing the complaint the implications and consequences are not properly visualized by the complainant such a complaint can lead to insurmountable harassment, agony, and pain to the complainant, accused, and his close relations. The ultimate object of justice is to find out the truth punish the guilty and protect the innocent. To find out the truth is a Herculean task in the majority of these complaints. The tendency to implicate the husband and all his immediate relations is also not uncommon. At times, even after the conclusion of the 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 the 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 complainant are required to be scrutinized with great care and circumspection. Experience reveals that long and protracted criminal trials lead to rancor, acrimony, and bitterness in the relationship among 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 an amicable settlement altogether. The process of suffering is extremely long and painful.” The entire family members are roped arising out in such type of case was the subject matter before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Geeta Mehrotra & another v. State of UP & another' [(2012) 10 SCC 741]. Further, the cases related to distant relatives were further subject matter before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K. Subba Rao v. The State of Telangana; [(2018) 14 SCC 452]. It is well settled if the High Court sitting under Section 482 Cr.P.C. even at a later stage, comes to the conclusion that the entire proceeding can be quashed, that power can be exercised with circumspection, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam and others v. State of Bihar & others; [(2022) 6 SCC 599].

By citing the above-mentioned judgments, the Hon’ble High Court further observed that “The Court finds that there are general and omnibus allegations against the petitioners and in one of the earlier cases, the final form was submitted in favor of the petitioners and during pendency of that case, the present case has been filed, which further suggest that maliciously the case has been lodged against the petitioners, who happened to be brother-in-law (Nandoi) and sister-in-law (Nanad) of the informant and they are residing at different place. In view of the above facts, reasons, and analysis, so far as these petitioners are concerned, the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Lower Bazar P.S. Case No.159/2016, corresponding to G.R. Case No.3469/2016 including the order taking cognizance dated 10.04.2017, pending in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi are quashed.”