MyNation KnowledgeBase

Landmark Judgments and Articles on Law

Register to Download

No material evidence 498A against Parents quashed

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.515/2019
(@ Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.180/2019)

Machindra & Anr. …Appellant(s)

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & Anr. …Respondent(s)

ORDER
1. Leave granted.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, learned counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra and the learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 – complainant.

3. This Appeal, by way of Special Leave Petition, is filed against the impugned order dated 21.06.2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay at Aurangabad, whereby the High Court rejected the appellants’ criminal application to quash criminal proceedings initiated by respondent no. 2 – complainant herein under the Domestic Signature Not Verified Violence Act and under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code alleging that they have harassed her for dowry.

4. This Court, on 03.01.2019, while dismissing the Special Leave Petition as against the husband, issued limited notice to the respondents, and stayed further proceedings in Case RCC No. 152 of 2016 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedpur District, Latur.

5. The counsel for the appellants contended that the allegations in the complaint are not substantiated and thus, the criminal proceedings emanating out of it deserve to be quashed. Further, it was contended that respondent no. 2­ complainant’s marriage with the son of the appellants was a second marriage, and before entering into the said marriage, the complainant had not taken any decree of divorce from her previous husband. It was also alleged that respondent no. 2­ complainant had made similar allegations against her first husband and his family.

READ  Acquitted in Section 498A IPC

6. We have perused the complaint filed by the complainant in which it has been stated that the father­ in­ law and mother­ in­ law have abused her verbally and demanded dowry. However, except these allegations in the complaint, there is no other substance in the complaint or any material evidence available on record to substantiate the same.

7. We are informed by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that they are aged 66 and 60 years respectively.

8. Taking into consideration the above background of the case, and in view of non­availability of any material to substantiate the allegations made by the complainant, we are of the considered opinion that it is a fit case where charges against the appellants, i.e., father­in­law and mother­in­law of respondent no. 2­ complainant, can be quashed.

We therefore quash the proceedings against the appellants. Stay granted by this Court vide order dated 03.01.2019 stands vacated and the trial court is directed to expedite the trial.

9. The appeal is allowed in the afore­stated terms.

J (N.V. RAMANA)
J (MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR)
NEW DELHI;

MARCH 15, 2019.

ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-A

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 180/2019

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21-06-2018 in CRLA No. 1977/2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay at Aurangabad) MACHINDRA & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA 177545/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT & IA 177547/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 15-03-2019 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM :

READ  If Notice returned with endorsement "refused" or "not available" presumed as served?

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Mr. Nishant, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Yatin M. Jagtap, Adv.

Mr. Rabin Majumder, AOR Mr. Shrikant R. Deshmukh, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.

The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. Pending applications filed in the matter also stand disposed of.

(VISHAL ANAND) (RAJ RANI NEGI)
COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Important SC/HC Judgements on 498A IPC
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 MyNation KnowledgeBase
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Section 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

READ  Acquitted in Section 498A IPC
MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation