FIR is Result of Vengeance Gross Misuse of Law Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Sec 498A Case against In-Laws

The Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Sec 498A Case in part, providing relief to the mother and sisters of a man accused of cruelty and criminal breach of trust. The case arose from an FIR registered in April 2022 at the Women Police Station, Chandigarh, under Sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.

The complaint was filed by the wife’s father, who alleged that his daughter’s marriage with the husband was solemnized in Chandigarh in April 2018. At that time, the husband was living in Sydney, Australia, while the wife was working in Doha, Qatar. Soon after marriage, both shifted to Sydney, where disputes allegedly arose. The wife accused the husband of cruelty, dowry demands of 8 lakhs, and misappropriation of her money. Eventually, she left his home with the help of her brother and Australian police and also filed a domestic violence case in Australia.

The complainant further alleged that when he approached the husband’s family in India, they abused him and refused to rehabilitate his daughter. This led to the registration of the FIR in Chandigarh.

Arguments of the Parties

The petitioners—the husband, his mother, and his sisters—sought quashing of the FIR. Their counsel argued that the dispute was purely matrimonial and had occurred abroad, where competent courts had already dealt with the matter. In fact, the Federal Circuit Court of Australia dissolved the marriage in September 2019, and the wife remarried in 2020.

They contended that the FIR was baseless as no alleged acts of cruelty or dowry demand took place in India. On the other hand, counsel for the Union Territory of Chandigarh opposed the petition, pointing out that the police inquiry confirmed the allegations. They stressed that the female petitioners did not cooperate with the investigation and that the husband misused anticipatory bail by leaving for Australia without permission. A Look Out Circular (LOC) was also issued against him.

Court’s Analysis

Justice Amarjot Bhatti carefully examined the facts. The Court noted that the entire matrimonial discord occurred in Sydney, not India. Importantly, the marriage had already been dissolved abroad, and the wife had remarried.

The Court found no evidence linking the mother and sisters to the alleged cruelty. The judgment stated that they never visited the matrimonial home of the couple in Sydney, making it impossible for them to interfere in the marriage. The Court described the FIR against them as “a result of vengeance” and concluded that it amounted to a gross misuse of the process of law.

Thus, the Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Sec 498A Case against the husband’s mother and sisters, including all subsequent proceedings and challan.

Different View on the Husband

However, the Court adopted a stricter view regarding the husband. It observed that after securing anticipatory bail, he traveled back to Australia without seeking permission from the concerned court. This amounted to a clear misuse of the concession of bail.

Therefore, the Court refused to quash the FIR against him. It held that the husband must continue to face proceedings under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC. On this ground, the petition was partly allowed—relief was granted to the mother and sisters, but denied to the husband.

In conclusion, the Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Sec 498A Case against family members but refuses to extend the same relief to the husband due to his conduct.

Case details: RAHUL SHUKLA AND ORS Vs. UT CHANDIGARH AND ANR