AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The present writ application has been filed for quashing and setting aside the impugned F.I.R. being II-C.R.No.108 of 2015 dated 20.10.2015 registered with Mahila Police Station, Dahod for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 502 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short " the IPC") and under Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 1961 (for short "the Act").
The brief facts of the impugned complaint are as under:-
The marriage of the complainant-respondent No.2 is solemnized about 10 years before lodging of the F.I.R. with Umesh (original accused No.1), son of the applicant No.1, residing at Dahod, as per rites and rituals of their caste. For the initial period of two years, the husband of the complainant had taken good care of the complainant. During that marriage life, from last 8 years, the husband of the complainant had told her that she is not able to conceive a child and her father has given less amount of dowry and thus they used to abuse and harass the complainant physically. The father-in law i.e. applicant No.1 and mother-in-law i.e. applicant No.2 both have tortured the complainant and told that the complainant is not able to conceive child and she does not know how to do the household properly and, therefore, they will bring the second wife of her husband and that is how they encouraged the husband of the complainant in front of the complainant and the husband of the complainant quarreled with the complainant and the father-in-law of the complainant also encouraged brother-in-law (respondent No.3) against the complainant.
In the year 2009, the complainant was brought to Oman by her husband to reside with him and during that time, the complainant was pregnant. At the time of four months of her pregnancy, the husband of the complainant brought the complainant to the gynecologist for check-up and during the check-up, it was diclosed by the doctor that she has conceived a female child, hence her husband had forced abortion. The husband of the complainant since did not want the female child, he took the complainant and left with her in-laws from Oman and left for foreign. The father-in-law and mother-in-law for one or another reason gave the abusive words to the complainant and left her with her parents, and thereafter the complainant had filed a private complaint at Chapri Court, Dahod in the year 2010, which is pending. The complainant was deserted from her house by the in-laws from last 6 years.
Learned advocate Mr. Patel for the applicants has submitted that there is no reason for the complainant to file the impugned F.I.R. since last more then 6 years, the complainant is not residing with the applicants. It is submitted that the applicant No.3 is residing outside his home for the educational and service purpose from 2006 and, therefore, there is no question of any physical or mental harassment by the applicant No.3 to the complainant, as alleged in the FIR. It is submitted that the complainant as alleged in the year 2010 filed the forged complaint under the provisions of the Prevention of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short " the D.V. Act") , which is pending till today. It is submitted that the marriage of the complainant and the accused No.1 solemnized on 23.11.2005 and the accused No.1 had left for Dubai on 04.12.2005. The fact that the accused No.1 served at Dubai and he has to leave for Dubai was very well within the knowledge of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant had gone to the parental home on 12.12.2005 and she frequently came to the in-laws house to reside till July 2009.
Learned advocate for the applicants Mr. Patel has submitted that during four years i.e. from November-2005 to March-2009, the complainant had completed her education while living with her in- laws. At that point of time, she had never complained about any harassment given by the in-laws. It is submitted by the learned advocate Mr. Patel that at Oman, the complainant had taken the medical treatment as she was pregnant and at that time, the accused No.1 was taking good care of the complainant. Unfortunately, due to serious bleeding problem to the complainant, miscarriage took place and she got aborted as per the medical advice.
Learned advocate Mr. Patel has submitted that, thereafter, she came to India with the accused No.1 and started living with her parents at her parental house. After about 16 months, she had filed the complaint under the provision of the D.V. Act against the in-laws by stating the fabricated facts. It is further submitted that during the pendency of the proceedings initiated under the D.V. Act, the threats were administered by the father of the complainant and other relatives of the complainant. The applicant No.1 and 2 had also made various complaints to that effect to the police authority. It is submitted that because of the intervention of the police the settlement was arrived between the parties on 31.07.2011.
Learned advocate for the applicants has submitted that there was constant harassment on the applicants by giving threats by the complainant and her family members during pendency of the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the D.V.Act to the applicants No.1 and 2 and because of that applicants No.1 and 2 had filed various complaints against the complainant and her family members. Lastly, as mentioned above, the applicants No. 1 and 2 had given the complaint against the complainant and her father and as a counter-blast, the impugned F.I.R. is registered with a view to create pressure and harass the applicants. Thus, it is submitted that the filing of the F.I.R. is nothing but an abuse and misuse of law, which is not permitted in the eyes of law and, therefore, the impugned F.I.R. is required to be quashed and set aside.
Learned advocate for the applicants has submitted that as per the medical papers produced herewith, it becomes clear that the allegations made by the complainant about her abortion have no substance. It is also pertinent to point out that at the time of medical treatment at Oman, the complainant is having pregnancy of 6 weeks. Therefore, it is not possible to know about the gender of the child in the womb.
Learned advocate for the applicants has submitted that the parental home of the complainant is hardly half kilometer away from the matrimonial home and if any harassment or demand of dowry was made the complainant would have informed to her parents or any other relatives, which is not the case of the complainant and, therefore also, the allegations about the harassment and demand of dowry is falsified.
Learned advocate Mr. Patel, has submitted that the complainant has already remarried and the certificate of the panchayat to that effect is produced on record.
Learned advocate Mr. Dave appearing for the complainant has submitted that he is unable to contact the complainant since long and there was no instructions.
I have heard the learned advocates for the respective parties. I have also perused the contents of the F.I.R. The present writ application has been filed by the applicant No.1- father-in-law, applicant No.2-mother-in-law and applicant No.3-brother in law.
The contents of the F.I.R. reveal that the marriage of the complainant was organized about 10 years with Umesh, who is the son of applicants No.1 and 2. It is alleged that during the marriage for initially two years, the husband of the complainant had taken good care and since last eight years she was harassed by the applicants that she is unable to conceive a child and her father has given less amount of dowry. The father-in law i.e. applicant No.1 and mother-in-law i.e. applicant No.2 both have tortured the complainant by alleging that she unable to conceive a child and she does not know how to do the household properly.
It is further alleged that in the year 2009, she conceived a female child, and her husband had got her aborted. It is alleged that her in-laws were living separately since last six years. Thus, in the complaint as per the say of the complainant, she has alleged that the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged after six years. Learned advocate has produced the documents relating to the abortion of the complainant at the hospital situated at Oman. The medical papers reveal that the complainant had conceived six months' pregnancy. Thus, the allegations made against the applicants since that the applicants used to harass her on the ground that she fails in conceiving the child gets obliterated by the medical paper and by her own statement. There is not a whisper in the FIR that the present applicants are in any manner responsible for the abortion. As regards the complicity of the applicants, who are father-in-law, mother-in-law and brother-in-law, it is noticed that vague and general allegations are levelled against them and there is no specific instances narrated by her. The Apex Court in the case of Rashmi Chopra Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & anr., reported in AIR 2019 SC 2297 has quashed the FIR for the offence under section 498-A of the IPC on the ground that the allegations were general and sweeping as no specific dates were mentioned.
"24. Coming back to the allegations in the complaint pertaining to Section 498A and Section ¾ of D.P. Act. A perusal of the complaint indicates that the allegations against the appellants for offence under Section 498A and Section ¾ of D.P. Act are general and sweeping. No specific incident dates or details of any incident has been mentioned in the complaint. The complaint having been filed after proceeding for divorce was initiated by Nayan Chopra in State of Michigan, where Vanshika participated and divorce was ultimately granted. A few months after filing of the divorce petition, the complaint has been filed in the Court of C.J.M., Gautam Budh Nagar with the allegations as noticed above. The sequence of the events and facts and circumstances of the case leads us to conclude that the complaint under Section 498A and Section ¾ of D.P. Act have been filed as counter blast to divorce petition proceeding in State of Michigan by Nayan Chopra.
There being no specific allegation regarding any one of the applicants except common general allegation against everyone I.e. "they started harassing the daughter of the applicant demanding additional dowry of one crore" and the fact that all relatives of the husband, namely, father, mother, brother, mother's sister and husband of mother's sister have been roped in clearly indicate that application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed with a view to harass the applicants..........."
In light of the aforenoted observations and analysis, the writ application succeeds. The impugned F.I.R. being II-C.R.No.108 of 2015 dated 20.10.2015 registered with Mahila Police Station, Dahod for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 502 and 114 of the IPC and under Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 1961 as well as all other consequential proceedings arising from the impugned F.I.R. are hereby quashed and set aside qua the present applicants. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.