The Division Bench of Justices Sunil Shukre and Govind Sanap while listening to a petition filed in the case of [Rajesh Himmat Pundkar v State of Maharashtra], refused to quash an FIR filed under Section 498 A against the relatives of the husband, observing that many times the relatives living in distant places also harass the wife while interfering in the issues between the couple. The petition was filed by the husband, his parents, and siblings to quash the FIR filed against them.
It was argued by the relatives of the husband that while the husband lived in the Akola district, his parents and a married sister lived in Amravati while his younger brother resided in the Pune city, they didn’t live with the couple and therefore, the allegations made against them could not be true.
Facts-
The couple got married in the year 2007 and three children were born to them. In the year 2017, the wife learnt of her husband’s extramarital affair, when she confronted him, he assaulted her.
About the relatives, the wife informed the Court in the FIR that when she informed them of his affair, they instead started abusing her,and were also demanding a dowry of rupees 50,000.
Need A Legal Advice
The internet is not a lawyer and neither are you. Talk to a real lawyer about your legal issue
Decision of the Court-
In an order passed on the 8th June, the Court refused to accept the argument based on two points-
Firstly, unless proved otherwise, it can’t be presumed under law that the relatives living in distant places are innocent. A relative, even if stays far away from the couple, in many cases can interfere in the affairs of the married couple and that too to such an extent that it would amount to harassment.
Secondly, it could be noticed that the allegations made by the wife against the applicants are specific in nature, and to test whether these allegations are genuine, could only be possible at the time of the trial and not at this stage.
Thus, just because the family members are not residing with the couple it can’t be denied that the allegations against them are not true. It was observed by the Court that no vague statements have been made against the in-laws but specific roles have been attributed to them.
Thus, the Court refused to quash the FIR.
Section 498 A-
In the year 1983, Section 498-A was introduced to protect the women from being subjected to cruelty by her husband and in-laws.
Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty: whoever, being the husband of the woman or relative of the husband, subjects the woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and be liable to fine.
Cruelty means:
under this Section cruelty means-
any conduct which is of such nature that it may drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (mental/physical) of the woman; or
Harassment of a woman with a view to coerce her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or for failing to meet such demands.
Object of the Provision:
Section 498A of IPC was introduced to curb the problem of dowry deaths and harassment of a woman by her husband or his relatives. However, in the Case of [Onkar Nath Mishra v State (NCT of Delhi) (2008)]
Who may file a Complaint:
The aggrieved woman or any person related to her by blood may file a complaint under this section.
Lead India provides you a wide pool of experienced lawyers who specialize in cases related to family laws as well as crimes related to women and children. Legal assistance, as well as guidance related to issues dealing with such issues, is also provided.
Talk to a Lawyer