SC quashes dowry importunity case filed by woman, says she wanted to’ inflict revenge’ The top court’s judgment came on a plea against an order of Madhya Pradesh High Court which refused to quash proceedings against the woman’s former sisters-in-law, The Supreme Court has quashed a dowry importunity case filed by a woman against her in- laws, saying she” easily wanted to inflict revenge” and allowing felonious proceedings to continue would affect in patent injustice.
A three-judge bench of judges Aniruddha Bose, Sanjay Kumar and SVN Bhatti said given the summation of data and circumstances, it was of the considered opinion that the woman’s allegations against her in- laws are wholly inadequate and, prima facie, don’t make out case against them. “She easily wanted to inflict revenge against her in- laws.The allegations are so far- brought and questionable that no prudent person can conclude that there are sufficient grounds to do against them. Permitting the felonious process to go on against the petitioners in such a situation would,thus, affect in clear and patent injustice,”the apex court said.The top court’s judgement came on a plea against an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which refused to quash the proceedings against the woman’s former sisters-in-law and mother-in-law.The woman, a schoolteacher by profession,had married in the time 2007.The hubby,still,secured a decree of divorce dissolving their marriage.
previous to the form of the divorce solicitation by the hubby,the woman made a written complaint to the police,leveling several allegations against her hubby and in- laws.In response to the complaint, police filed an FIR against them under Indian Penal Code section 498A(hubby or relation of hubby of a woman subjugating her to atrocity)and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,1961.The top court said the allegations levelled by the woman are substantially general and omnibus in nature, without any specific details as to how and when her sisters in-law and mother-in-law, who lived in different metropolises altogether,subordinated her to importunity for dowry.It said most dangerous to the woman’s case is the fact that she did nothing whatsoever after leaving her nuptial home in February 2009,and filed a complaint in the time 2013 professing dowry importunity,just before her hubby introduced divorce proceedings.
Written by: Shaikh Rizwan , Government Law College, Mumbai , 2nd Year intern under legal vidhiya.
