A view of the SC.
Credit: Getty images
The Supreme Court has quashed a dowry harassment case against a judicial officer, his architect brother and mother, lodged on a complaint by the wife of his other brother, saying "she clearly wanted to wreak vengeance against her in-laws".
A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose, Sanjay Kumar and S V N Bhatti found "glaring inconsistencies and discrepancies" on the complainant's version, and held her allegations are, wholly insufficient and, prima facie, do not make a case against the appellants.
"Further, they are so farfetched and improbable that no prudent person can conclude that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against them. Permitting the criminal process to go on against the appellants in such a situation would, therefore, result in clear and patent injustice," the bench said.
The court rejected a contention to dismiss the appellants' plea to quash the FIR since charge sheet has already been filed in the matter.
"It is well settled that the High Court would continue to have the power to entertain and act upon a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR even when a charge sheet is filed by the police during the pendency of such petition," the bench said.
The court said instances of a husband’s family members filing a petition to quash criminal proceedings launched against them by his wife in the midst of matrimonial disputes are neither a rarity nor of recent origin and precedents aplenty abound on this score.
The bench allowed an appeal filed by Abhishek and others against the Madhya Pradesh HC's order and quashed the FIR lodged by his sister-in-law, Bhawna against them in 2013, four years after the complainant left her matrimonial home.
The bench said the complainant's interactions with the in-laws were only three-four times during a festival. Sourabh, an architect, was stationed in Delhi since 2007. Other appellant Abhishek became judicial officer six to seven months after Bhawna's marriage in 2007.
"Surprisingly, Bhawna alleges that at the time of his own marriage, Abhishek demanded that Bhawna and her parents should provide him with a car and Rs 2 lakh in cash. Why he would make such a demand for dowry, even if he was inclined to commit such an illegality, from his sister-in-law at the time of his own marriage is rather incongruous and difficult to comprehend," the bench said.
The court noted that she filed a "vicious" complaint against him in the high court, showing "she clearly wanted to wreak vengeance against her in-laws".
The bench said her allegations were mostly general, without any specific details as to how and when her brothers-in-law and mother-in-law, who lived in different cities altogether, subjected her to harassment for dowry.
"Most damaging to Bhawna’s case is the fact that she did nothing whatsoever after leaving her matrimonial home in February, 2009, and filed a complaint in the year 2013 alleging dowry harassment, just before her husband instituted divorce proceedings," it said.