Can wife lodge criminal case Against Husband and In-Laws after receiving Divorce Notice
In a recent development, the High Court of Karnataka, rendered its verdict on two criminal petitions seeking the quashing of a complaint and FIR related to dowry harassment.The petitions were heard jointly and dealt with allegations of offenses punishable under Sections 498A, 504, 323, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.The first petition was filed by Nagesh Gundyal and Vijaya, residents of Solapur, Maharashtra, who stood as accused Nos. 2 and 3 in the case.The second petition was filed by Anjana (also known as Anjali) and Anil Paspule, residents of Solapur, who were accused of Nos. 4 and 5.The respondents in both petitions were the State, represented by the Deodurga Police Station, and Suma, wife of Gopal Gundyal.According to the complaint, Suma, respondent No. 2, entered into marriage with Gopal Gundyal, accused No. 1, on May 30, 2013. Allegedly, dowry was provided during the wedding, including cash, gold, and household items.The complaint further alleged that after three years of marriage, Suma faced continuous harassment from her in-laws, who insisted she relocates to Pune and resides with her husband. It was further claimed that on December 22, 2018, all the accused, including the petitioners, unlawfully entered Suma’s house, assaulted her family members, and employed abusive language.In defense, the petitioners argued that the allegations made in the complaint were absurd and devoid of a prima facie case. They sought the court’s intervention to quash the proceedings, relying on a precedent established by the Supreme Court in the case of Kahkashan Kousar and others vs. the State of Bihar and others (2022) 6 SCC 599.After hearing arguments from both parties and thoroughly examining the complaint and associated documents, the High Court delivered its verdict.Taking into account the Supreme Court’s ruling in Taramani Parakh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others (2015) 11 SCC 260, the court noted that although the complaint contained serious allegations, they were general in nature and lacked sufficient grounds to invoke the charges provisions.Additionally, the court considered the fact that respondent No. 2 had lodged the complaint subsequent to receiving a divorce notice from her husband, suggesting a possible retaliatory motive.Based on these considerations, the High Court granted both petitions, thereby quashing the complaint and FIR at Deodurga Police Station.“The criminal case filed by the wife, alleging cruelty, dowry harassment against the husband and in-laws loses its significance, in case the complaint is made, after receiving the divorce notice from her husband.” the court noted.Case Name: NG & others And State of KarnatakaDr. Ajay Kummar Pandey
( LLM, MBA, (UK), PhD, AIMA, AFAI, PHD Chamber, ICTC, PCI, FCC, DFC, PPL, MNP, BNI, ICJ (UK), WP, (UK), MLE, Harvard Square, London, CT, Blair Singer Institute, (USA), Dip. in International Crime, Leiden University, the Netherlands )Advocate & Consultant, Supreme Court of India & High Courts4C Supreme Law International, Delhi, NCR. Mumbai & DubaiTel: M- 91- 9818320572. Email: editor.kumar@gmail.comWebsite: www.ajaykr.com, www.4Csupremelawint.com
Facebook: /4Clawfirm, /legalajay/ Linkedin: /ajaykumarpandey1/ Twitter: /editorkumar / YouTube: c/4cSupremeLaw/ Insta: /editor.kumarg134
