The High Court of Andhra Pradesh has quashed criminal proceedings against two women accused under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, ruling that vague and general allegations of taunting a woman for not conceiving are insufficient to sustain charges of cruelty or dowry harassment.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Harinath N. in CRLP No. 4896 of 2023 filed by accused Nos. 2 to 5 in C.C. No. 623 of 2023 pending before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-cum-Principal Junior Civil Judge, Srikakulam.
Background
The petitioners—parents and sisters of the primary accused (the husband)—sought quashing of the proceedings against them, asserting that they had not interfered in the marital life of the complainant (third respondent). It was specifically contended that the sisters (petitioners 3 and 4) were married and residing in different cities and thus had no proximity or involvement to justify the accusations.
Arguments
Counsel for the petitioners argued that the allegations in the complaint were omnibus and lacked specific details regarding the alleged acts of cruelty or dowry harassment. The complaint and witness statements did not identify any dates or events indicating sustained or specific acts of harassment by the petitioners.
It was also submitted that petitioners 3 and 4 were arraigned solely to harass them and to pressure the principal accused (husband).
The State and the third respondent opposed the quashing.
Court’s Analysis
The Court noted that the complaint did not reveal any specific allegations against petitioners 3 and 4. The only claim against them was that they taunted the third respondent for not conceiving, and that they allegedly instigated the husband to harass his wife.
Justice Harinath N. observed:
“Even if the allegations made against the petitioners 3 and 4 are to be taken as true and correct for the purpose of the case, no case can be made out against the petitioners 3 and 4 under Section 498A IPC or Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.”
The Court further held that:
“Such vague allegations without any specific details as to on what date and when the said taunting was resorted to by petitioners 3 and 4 cannot sustain the scrutiny of law.”
It was also highlighted that petitioners 3 and 4 were living away from the matrimonial home and there was no evidence suggesting their direct involvement or continuous presence to substantiate the charge of cruelty.
The judge remarked:
“This case is another where the unconnected relatives of the first accused are roped in as accused only for wreaking out vengeance against the first accused.”
Decision
Concluding that continuation of the proceedings against petitioners 3 and 4 would amount to abuse of the process of law, the Court quashed the criminal case C.C. No. 623 of 2022 as against them.
“The criminal petition is allowed in part. Accordingly, C.C. No. 623 of 2022… is hereby quashed against petitioners 3 and 4.”
Citation
Basuru Mani Bhushana Rao & Others vs State of Andhra Pradesh & Others, CRLP No. 4896 of 2023
