Section 498A of IPC are being rampantly misused by the Complainant, wherein All family members are roped in to harass them- Gujrat High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 7061 of 2017

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

==========================================================

==========================================================

JYANTILAL VADILAL SHAH & 1 other(s)

Versus

STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)

==========================================================

Appearance:

MS.YOGINI H UPADHYAY(6695) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2 MOHINI H DAVE(7849) for the Respondent(s) No. 2

MR SOAHAM JOSHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT

Date : 22/06/2023

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. This application is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (`the Code’ for short) praying to quash the FIR registered as C.R.No.I- 110 of 2016 with GIDC Vatva Police Station, Ahmedabad city for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 323 and 114 of the  Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this application are such that the son of the applicants married the respondent no.2 on 28.2.2000 and thereafter, after some  time, theapplicants started  demanding dowry and started to harass the complainant more and more. It is stated that due to illicit relation of her husband   with one lady, the things  went more worse and we started living separately from the in-laws i.e. the present applicants. It is stated that as the respondent  no.2- complainant  started opposing her husband about the illicit relation, he started beating the complainant. Thus, the impugned complaint was filed against her husband,in-laws i.e. the present applicants and the lady with whom, the husband of the complainant had alleged illicit relations. It is this  FIR which is sought to be quashed in this application.
3. At the outset, it is to be mentioned that the applicant no.1-accused no.2, who is father-in-law of the complainant  has  expired and the application is abated qua applicant no.1.So, now, the application is required to be considered for applicant no.2 who is accused no.3 and mother-in-law of the respondent no.2-complainant.

Read More