Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court on Friday (Sep. 26) quashed criminal proceedings against a woman's in-laws, who had been accused of domestic cruelty and subjecting her to mental torture, based on a vague and general allegation.

The bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai and comprising Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Atul S Chandurkar allowed the appeal filed by the woman's father-in-law, mother-in-law, and sister-in-law, setting aside the Bombay High Court's refusal to quash the case.

The FIR against them alleged the offences punishable under Sections 498-A(cruelty), 377 (unnatural sex) and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The Court held that the FIR contained only vague and omnibus allegations against the appellants without specific details. While the complainant alleged that her husband coerced her into unnatural sex and subjected her to mental harassment, the bench noted that these charges were directed solely at the husband and not at his family members.

Relying on Digambar and Another Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Another, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 1025, the Court reiterated that “for making out an offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Penal Code is concerned, the requirement is that there has to be cruelty inflicted against the victim which either drives her to commit suicide or cause grave injury to herself or lead to such conduct that would cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health.”

“If the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint, even when taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out any case against the accused, quashing of the proceedings would be justified. Vague and general allegations cannot lead to forming a prima facie case.”, the Court added.

“There are other omnibus statements made in the complaint without any particulars whatsoever. It is also to be noted that for the purpose of constituting an offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Penal Code, cruelty as indicated in the Explanation to the said provision must be stated to be inflicted. The cruelty caused by the husband and his family members should be of such nature that it is inflicted with the intention to cause grave injury or drive the victim to commit suicide or inflict grave injury to herself. Such allegations are absent in the present case. We do not find that on a complete reading of the complaint, a prima facie case for proceeding under Section 498-A of the Penal Code has been made out against the appellants.”, the judgment authored by Justice Chandurkar said..

Regarding the allegation of unnatural sex labelled against the husband, the Court observed:

“As regards the offence punishable under Sections 377 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code is concerned, it is seen that the allegations in this regard have been made only against the complainant's husband and not against the present appellants. The entire tenor of the complaint in that regard seeks to implicate the complainant's husband arising out of incidents stated therein relate to him. There is no allegation whatsoever in that context against the appellants that would require them to face trial on that count.”

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed.

Cause Title: SANJAY D. JAIN & ORS. VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 960

Click here to read/download the judgment

Related - 'Nowadays, Mother-in-Law & Husband Very Wary Of Wife Due To False Complaints; S.498A IPC Very Draconian ': Supreme Court

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kartik Shukul, Adv. Mr. Gharote Anurag A, AOR Ms. Viddusshi, Adv. Mr. Raghav Tiwari, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : R-1, 3, 4 Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv.

R-2 Mr. Sachin Patil, Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, AOR Mr. Satyajit A. Desai, Adv. Mr. Sachin Singh, Adv. Mr. Pratik Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Puneet Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sanchit Agrahari, Adv. Ms. Gauri Gautam, Adv.