<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday held that criminal law cannot be set in motion against every relative of a husband in matrimonial disputes based on sweeping and omnibus allegations lacking specific facts.</p><p>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh emphasised that while protecting victims of domestic violence is crucial, courts must ensure that criminal proceedings are not indiscriminately extended to family members without a clear factual foundation showing their active involvement.</p>.Mere knowledge about second marriage not enough to sustain bigamy charges against in-laws: Supreme Court.<p>The bench observed that matrimonial disputes often involve heightened emotions, leading to complaints that routinely implicate not just the husband but his entire family, including relatives who may have had little or no role in the discord. </p><p>Mere familial association or failure to support the wife cannot, by itself, constitute a criminal offence, the court said.</p><p>“Courts are required to exercise greater caution and carefully scrutinise whether the allegations genuinely disclose the commission of cognizable offences against each accused individually,” the bench remarked.</p><p>The court made these observations while quashing a 2023 FIR registered in Madhya Pradesh against Arti Mehta and three other family members of a man, including charges under the Dowry Prohibition Act. </p><p>It also quashed parallel proceedings initiated against them under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.</p><p>The court noted that the marriage between the complainant and the man had already been dissolved by a family court through a decree of divorce during the pendency of the case. </p><p>However, it clarified that the trial court should proceed against the remaining accused.</p><p>The bench added that its order will not prevent the trial court from exercising powers under Section 319 CrPC to summon the quashed accused if sufficient evidence emerges during the trial.</p><p>The court struck a balance by acknowledging that genuine cases of cruelty and domestic violence do occur and may not always have independent witnesses or immediate evidence. At the same time, it said, continuation of criminal proceedings against relatives based solely on generalised allegations would amount to abuse of the process of law.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday held that criminal law cannot be set in motion against every relative of a husband in matrimonial disputes based on sweeping and omnibus allegations lacking specific facts.</p><p>A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh emphasised that while protecting victims of domestic violence is crucial, courts must ensure that criminal proceedings are not indiscriminately extended to family members without a clear factual foundation showing their active involvement.</p>.Mere knowledge about second marriage not enough to sustain bigamy charges against in-laws: Supreme Court.<p>The bench observed that matrimonial disputes often involve heightened emotions, leading to complaints that routinely implicate not just the husband but his entire family, including relatives who may have had little or no role in the discord. </p><p>Mere familial association or failure to support the wife cannot, by itself, constitute a criminal offence, the court said.</p><p>“Courts are required to exercise greater caution and carefully scrutinise whether the allegations genuinely disclose the commission of cognizable offences against each accused individually,” the bench remarked.</p><p>The court made these observations while quashing a 2023 FIR registered in Madhya Pradesh against Arti Mehta and three other family members of a man, including charges under the Dowry Prohibition Act. </p><p>It also quashed parallel proceedings initiated against them under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.</p><p>The court noted that the marriage between the complainant and the man had already been dissolved by a family court through a decree of divorce during the pendency of the case. </p><p>However, it clarified that the trial court should proceed against the remaining accused.</p><p>The bench added that its order will not prevent the trial court from exercising powers under Section 319 CrPC to summon the quashed accused if sufficient evidence emerges during the trial.</p><p>The court struck a balance by acknowledging that genuine cases of cruelty and domestic violence do occur and may not always have independent witnesses or immediate evidence. At the same time, it said, continuation of criminal proceedings against relatives based solely on generalised allegations would amount to abuse of the process of law.</p>