The Karnataka High Court on 28th June 2024, quashed criminal proceedings against a person who accused of dowry harassment and cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The proceedings were quashed on grounds that the FIR filed by the complainant was frivolous and in doing so, the complainant was in gross misuse and abuse of the process of law.
The Court reiterated the holding of the Supreme Court that it is the duty of the High Court to to look into the FIR with care and little more closely and ascertain whether necessary ingredients to constitute the offence is disclosed or not, as many a time frivolous and vexatious proceedings are permitted to continue [para. 9].
The facts of the case concerned a marriage between the primary accused and his wife which was solemnised in May 2020. Shortly after, the accused (petitioner) – a USA resident, returned to the USA for his visa renewal, leaving his wife in Bangalore.
The petitioner submitted that, efforts were made to bring his wife to the USA, including multiple unsuccessful visa applications. The petitioner further stated that despite these efforts, their relationship deteriorated, leading him to file for divorce and subsequently lodge a police complaint against his wife.
In response, the wife accused the petitioner of failing to disclose crucial health information, specifically alleging sexually transmitted disease (STD) She argued that these health concerns, along with alleged neglect during personal emergencies, constituted mental cruelty.
The petitioner’s Counsel contended that no evidence was submitted before the court by his wife to establish that the petitioner has pressurised her for dowry which are essential elements under Section 498A of the IPC.
Further it was contended that the petitioner had diligently pursued legal avenues to resolve marital issues and facilitate his wife’s relocation to the USA.
The Karnataka High Court noted a lack of substantiation regarding dowry harassment or any coercive demands for property or valuables. The court also highlighted discrepancies in the wife’s accusations regarding the petitioner’s health, noting that medical reports submitted before the court contradicted her claims of her husband’s STD conditions.
After careful consideration of all evidence and legal arguments, the court ruled in favour of the petitioner. The bench found that the allegations made by the petitioner’s wife did not meet the necessary legal standards for invoking Section 498A and other related provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The court concluded that the case appeared to be an instance of misuse of legal provisions and abuse of the criminal justice system.
Judgment and Citation:
SRI. XXXXXXXXXX vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & Anr.,CRIMINAL PETITION No.1803 OF 2023
Legislation referred to:
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
Reported by: Sakkcham Singh Parmaar
Read the complete judgment here.