Lack of Specific Allegations and Separate Living Arrangements Lead to Dismissal of Charges
In a significant judgment, the Karnataka High Court, Kalaburagi Bench, quashed criminal proceedings against the in-laws and other relatives of a complainant in a domestic violence case, citing lack of specific allegations and separate living arrangements. The decision was rendered by Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, who found that the continuation of legal proceedings against the petitioners would amount to an abuse of the process of law.
The petitioners, related to accused No.8, the husband of the complainant, had sought relief under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. They argued that the complaint lacked any specific allegations or overt acts against them. The allegations in the complaint were described as bald, omnibus, and unsubstantiated. Additionally, the petitioners did not share a household with the complainant, as they resided separately.
The complainant's written statement acknowledged that her husband had left for abroad multiple times and that they lived separately from the petitioners after a family partition. Allegations of harassment were directed primarily at her husband, with no specific instances against the in-laws.
Justice Magadum emphasized that the petitioners, including the aged parents-in-law and sisters-in-law living in their respective matrimonial homes, should not be subjected to the rigors of a criminal trial without concrete evidence. The court noted that the complainant could still pursue legal action against her husband, where the allegations of cruelty and neglect were consistently directed.
The judgment underscores the importance of specific allegations in prosecuting domestic violence cases and highlights the court's role in preventing misuse of the legal process. The proceedings against the petitioners were quashed, allowing the complainant to proceed against her husband in accordance with the law.
Bottom Line:
Criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and 109 read with Section 34 IPC against in-laws and other relatives of the complainant quashed due to lack of specific allegations and absence of shared household. Complainant permitted to proceed against husband.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528, Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 109, and 34.
Smt. Abeda v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka)(Kalaburagi Bench) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2833556
