The Telangana High Court Friday quashed criminal proceedings against the aged parents and married sister of a man accused of dowry harassment and cheating.
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi noted that the allegations against the in-laws were vague and lacked specific details, amounting to an “abuse of process of law”. However, the primary accused, the husband, will face trial for the alleged offences.
The case pertains to a wife’s complaint alleging offences under Sections 498-A (cruelty by husband or relatives of husband), and 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The couple has been married since 2009 and has two children. According to the wife, the husband subjected her to physical and mental harassment at the instigation of his family members. The wife alleged that the children were taken away from her to Gurgaon without her knowledge or consent by the husband.
The petitioners (the husband, his parents, and sister) sought to quash the proceedings against them in a case on the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Hyderabad. The counsel for the petitioners argued that there were no specific allegations against them, and they never interfered in the marital issues or demanded dowry. They also highlighted that the parents are aged (70 and 60 years) and that the in-laws reside in Gurgaon, Haryana, away from the couple’s home.
Referencing a Supreme Court decision in ‘Dara Lakshmi Narayana and others versus State of Telangana and another’, the high court stated, “Making vague and generalised allegations during matrimonial conflicts, if not scrutinized, will lead to the misuse of legal processes and an encouragement for use of arm twisting tactics by a wife and/or her family.” The court noted that “Sometimes, recourse is taken to invoke Section 498-A of the IPC against the husband and his family in order to seek compliance with the unreasonable demands of a wife.”
The Court stated that there are no specific allegations of dowry demand, dishonesty, or fraudulent intention attributable to the parents and sister. It noted that the primary allegation revolved around the husband’s conduct of taking the children, which the court stated does not fall under Sections 420 or 498-A of the IPC. The court further observed that despite allegations of physical assault by the husband, there was no medical evidence or statement from a competent medical practitioner to substantiate the claims.
