The single bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court observing the misuse of Section 498A of IPC (the Indian Penal Court) and expressed several remarks on it.
The bench of Justice Vivek Rusia, further added in context of misuse of Section 498A, that it is a package of 5 cases which is filed against husband and family members in family court and in the criminal court involving various acts and sections of the IPC.
The bench also observed that parents are made to suffer as husband and wife resides outside India and the burden of litigation falls on their parents.
“Now a day it is very common for the husband and wife to reside or do jobs outside of India and their parents are made to suffer in India by way of criminal or matrimonial litigation.”, the bench observed.
The wife alleged
The wife Pallavi lodged a complaint in Indore stating that her parents spent Rs. 50 to 60 lakhs and also gave gold and silver ornaments to the applicants. She further alleged that her honeymoon in Shimla was spolied as her father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law (Jethani) also came to Shimla and taunted her demanding Rs 10 lakh and a car. After returning from their honeymoon, her husband Kartik Mathur left for Australia saying that he was unhappy with her as his parents did not fulfill his demands. Thereafter, a month after the marriage, she was beaten up and thrown out of the matrimonial home.
The Husband submission
The father-in-law Rajan Mathur is a retired Air Force Officer and his elder son is Lt.Col. an Army Officer. Hartik is the youngest son of Rajan.
In their submission to the court, Indore was only a venue for the marriage and none of the parties have ever resided at Indore. He alleged that the case was filed in Indore with an intention to harass the applicants as no offence said to have been committed there. It was also submitted that Kartik wife Pallavi herself left the matrimonial house and since then she is residing in Navi Mumbai now in Australia.
It was also submitted that sister-in-law (Jethani) was unnecessarily dragged as she stays with her husband and was temporarily residing with her in-laws.
It was also alleged that, on the 2nd day of the marriage the Pallavi disclosed that she was having a relationship with a boy before marriage. She also sent an email to Kartik in which there is no such allegations of dowry demand.
The Bench
The bench said that Indore police has wrongly registered the FIR as there is nothing on record which established the charge of 498-A of the I.P.C.. There is no material which supports that Pallavi’s father is an resident of Indore. The bench also noted that no incident reported at Indore.
The bench also observed that only oral allegations about assault but no MLC on record.
The bench made a strong remark against the misuse of section 498a of IPC and said that, women are using Section 498a to punish husband or his relatives.
“Nowadays the very purpose of the insertion of Section 498-A in the Penal Code, 1860 with the object to punish the husband or his relatives, has been defined. In most of the cases, this section is being misused as observed by several High Courts and the Hon’ble Supreme Court”, the bench observed.
The bench further make a remark exposing the misuse of Section 498a stated that it is a package of 5 cases against husband.
“The cases are lodged under Section 498-A of the Penal Code, 1860 only to settle the matrimonial dispute. some times the FIR wife lodges the FIR immediately after receipt of the summons from the Family courts. Nowadays there is a package of 5 cases against the husband and family members in family court and the criminal court under I.P.C., the Hindu Marriage Act and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.”, the bench observed.
The bench also referred the case of Geeta Mehrotra v. State of UP.
“The Courts have experienced that on the general and omnibus allegations the family members and distant relatives are being roped in a case arising out of Section 498-A of the Penal Code, 1860, which was considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Geeta Mehrotra v. State of UP”, the bench observed.
The bench referring the misuse of Section 498a stated that court should excercise power to protect husband and relatives.
“the High Court should exercise the power conferred under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to protect the relatives of the husband in matrimonial dispute in order to do the complete justice and prevent misuse of the process of law.”, the bench observed.
The bench also observed that both the husband and wife both have settled in Australia and living seperately and their parents are facinf all their charges.
“At present, the husband and wife both have settled in Australia. The parents of the husband are being harassed by way of the criminal case in India.”
The bench quashed the FIR as well as the proceedings in the criminal case.
