Karnataka High Court quashes dowry harassment case against in-laws, terms allegations ‘trivial discord’

Bengaluru: The high court has quashed proceedings for dowry harassment against the mother-in-law, father-in-law and sister-in-law of the complainant wife, observing that the case at hand projects a classic illustration of trivial discords amplified into criminal prosecution under IPC section 498A.

Justice M Nagaprasanna said that a reading of the complaint and the chargesheet indicate that a commonplace domestic discord and minor skirmishes, not uncommon in a joint family setting, have been elevated to the pedestal of criminality.

The relationship between the couple had fallen apart barely six months after the marriage and the wife filed a complaint with Basaveshwaranagar police in Bengaluru alleging cruelty by the husband, (accused number 1), the mother-in-law, father-in-law and sister-in-law.

The complainant contended that during pre-marriage deliberations, the family members of the husband demanded Rs 25 lakh, 300 gm gold and 3 kgs silver as well as providing a rented accommodation to the groom in the USA.

The complainant further stated that the engagement ceremony was held at ITC Gardenia hotel in Bengaluru and the marriage was performed at Lalitha Mahal, Mysuru. The petitioners claimed that there was no allegation whatsoever against them.

The court noted that the allegations are general and omnibus in nature and devoid of specific particulars as to time, date or overt acts.

Even in respect of dowry demands, the narration pertains predominantly to pre-marital discussions spanning between December 2017-February 2018 ostensibly in the context of marriage expenses, the court noted.

“The complaint thus, does not delineate any concrete demand of dowry attributable to the petitioners, nor does it articulate conduct, meeting the statutory threshold of cruelty, as obtaining under Section 498A of the IPC,” the court said.

Justice Nagaprasanna further noted that the complaint and the chargesheet summary, read in tandem, fails to satisfy the essential ingredients of the offences alleged against the petitioners.

“Section 498A of the IPC contemplates cruelty of a nature likely to drive a woman to suicide or cause grave injury or harassment with a view to coerce unlawful demands for property. The sine qua non of the offence is not mere marital discord, but cruelty of a grave character tied to unlawful demands,” the court said.

The court further said, “The Supreme Court cautions against permitting criminal law to be wielded as a weapon, to ensnare entire families in the vortex of matrimonial discord. In Sushil Kumar Purbey vs State of Bihar case, the Supreme Court held that mere existence of quarrels or strained relations does not ipso facto constitute cruelty within the meaning of the provision.”