Taunts here and there by in-laws against wife part of family life, not cruelty: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently quashed criminal proceedings against the in-laws of a woman who had filed a complaint under Section 498A (cruelty by husband and family members) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) shortly after being served summons in her husband’s divorce petition..A bench of Justices Manmohan and Manoj Misra took note of the timing of the complaint and the nature of the allegations to observe,“In matters arising from matrimonial disputes, particularly where the allegations are levelled after many years of marriage and, that too, after one party initiates divorce proceeding against the other, the Court must be circumspect in taking the allegations at their face value. Rather, it must examine, where allegations of mala fides are there, whether those allegations have been levelled with an oblique purpose. More so, while considering the prayer of the relatives of the husband.".The couple had been married since 2005. The husband filed for divorce in May 2019, and three days after receiving summons, the wife lodged a police complaint. She alleged physical assault and mental harassment by her husband, and accused her in-laws of subjecting her to taunts and withholding her salary.The Gujarat High Court had earlier dismissed the husband's petition seeking quashing of the FIR. The Supreme Court found that the High Court had “adopted an extremely pedantic approach” and failed to consider the broader circumstances of the case.It found that the complaint lacked specific details and noted that the complainant had been living separately and working full-time for several years prior to filing the case. Finding the allegations against the in-laws to be vague, the Court proceeded to quash the complaint against the in-laws. “As against the parents-in-law, the allegations are only of extending taunts and of not parting with the money for managing household expenses…A few taunts here and there is a part of everyday life which for happiness of the family are usually ignored,” the Court said..It further noted that the complainant’s own parents and uncle had advised her to exercise patience in the interest of the family. In this context, the Court held that allowing prosecution against the parents-in-law would amount to an abuse of process.At the same time, it declined to quash proceedings against the husband, stating that there were specific allegations of cruelty that warranted trial.Accordingly, the FIR and criminal proceedings against the parents-in-law stood quashed. The case against the husband will proceed in accordance with law..The appellant was represented by Advocates Mohd Parvez Dabas, Uzmi Jameel Husain, Nadeem Qureshi and Syed Mehdi Imam.The respondents were represented by Advocates Prashant Bhagwati, Swati Ghildiyal, Siddhant Sharma and Praful Bhardwaj.