Gujarat High Court
Udhayshankar Muktinath Chaudhary vs State Of Gujarat on 30 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 14087 of 2021
==========================================================
UDHAYSHANKAR MUKTINATH CHAUDHARY & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. VARUN G RAI(7135) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. SOAHAM JOSHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 30/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), the petitioners have prayed to quash and set aside the complaint being C.R. No.I-158 of 2017 filed before the JP Road Police Station, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. The aforesaid complaint alleges offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306, 507 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. Shorn of non-essential details, the relevant factual matrix of the lis in hand is adumbrated, thus: The complainant's daughter, Sweety, aged about 21 years, was married to the petitioners' son, Deepak, around four years prior to the incident, in accordance with caste rites and customs. At the time of marriage, she was given household articles, ornaments of gold and silver, and an Alto car in kanyadan. Initially, she resided with her in-laws, while her husband Page 1 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined Deepak was employed in Vadodara. It is the case of the prosecution that though Sweety lived happily for about a year, thereafter discord arose on account of her alleged "urban outlook," which was disfavoured by petitioner no.2. It is further alleged that the petitioners taunted her regarding the inadequacy of dowry, questioned what she had brought from her parental home, and subjected her to harassment on that count. Allegations are also made that they took away her mobile phone, berated her for calling her parents frequently, and created frequent quarrels, on account of which the complainant had to intervene to settle matters.
2.1. It is further alleged that after Sweety began cohabiting with her husband in Vadodara, the petitioners continued to harass her telephonically by taunting her for not saving money, for not bearing a child, and by hurling abuses, causing her to suffer mental tension and distress. On 26.10.2017, Sweety last spoke to her mother in the morning and also sent festival greetings to a relative in the afternoon. Thereafter, when her mother repeatedly tried to contact her, the calls went unanswered. Later in the evening, the complainant was informed by his son-in-law Deepak that Sweety had committed suicide by hanging. It is the specific allegation of the complainant that owing to persistent cruelty and mental harassment at the hands of the petitioners on account of alleged insufficiency of dowry and childlessness, his daughter was driven to commit suicide, leading to the registration of the impugned FIR.
3. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that the impugned is manifestly misconceived and constitutes an abuse of the Page 2 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined process of law. It is contended that the allegations in the FIR pertain to the alleged harassment and mental cruelty of the complainant's daughter by the petitioners, and the purported causation of her suicide. However, the factual matrix, as delineated in the record, is utterly devoid of any indicia of cruelty, harassment, or demand for dowry on the part of the petitioners.
3.1. It is submitted that the complainant's daughter, Sweety, had been residing with her husband at Vadodara for a considerable period prior to the alleged incident, during which no grievance or complaint was ever made against the petitioners. The petitioners have only been accused of occasional telephonic conversations which, in no manner, amount to harassment or mental cruelty capable of attracting the provisions of Section 498A IPC or Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. There is, further, no evidence of any overt act or demand of dowry. Allegation in category of being general and vague cannot be continued as cruelty or harassment defined in Section 498 of the IPC or demand of dowry defined in Section 3 and 7 of the dowry prohibition Act. The FIR, on its face, does not mention any specific allegation regarding the time, date, or place of any incident that could amount to cruelty or harassment; it only alleges telephonic verbal abuse.
3.2. It is further submitted that the continuance of proceedings based on such allegations would cause grave prejudice to the petitioners, who are law-abiding citizens, and would serve no judicial purpose. In absence whereof, the very foundation of the allegations crumbles. Learned counsel relies upon the settled Page 3 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined principles that FIRs must not be allowed to be a weapon for personal vendetta or harassment, particularly when there is no corroborative evidence of cruelty, dowry demand, or abetment.
3.3. Ergo, it is submitted that in view of the prevenient ratiocination, the FIR is liable to be quashed under the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as it is wholly untenable in law and fact, and continuing the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process.
4. Though duly served, none remained present for the private respondent.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the petition and requested that a necessary order be passed based on the merits of the case and the material on record.
6. I have heard the learned advocate for the petitioners and the learned APP for the State and have perused the record of the case. The short question that falls for consideration before this Court is whether the continuation of criminal proceedings against the present petitioners would amount to an abuse of the process of law, thereby warranting the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
7. The power vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is of a wide and plenary nature. It is a provision of law that Page 4 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined saves the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Code, or to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. The Supreme Court has, in a catena of decisions, laid down the guidelines for the exercise of this extraordinary power. In the landmark case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, the Apex Court enunciated several categories of cases where the High Court could exercise its jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings. These include cases where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. Relevant para is as under:-
"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Ch. XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Art. 226 or the inherent powers under sec. 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence Page 5 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under sec. 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of sec. 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a noncognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under sec. 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an Page 6 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."
8. Furthermore, the Supreme Court has time and again expressed its concern over the misuse of Section 498A of the IPC and the increasing tendency to implicate all relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes. In a recent pronouncement, the Supreme Court observed that there is a growing trend of complainant-wives indiscriminately arraying aged parents, distant relatives, and married sisters living separately as accused in such disputes. The Court has cautioned that the inclusion of family members in a criminal case arising out of a matrimonial dispute, without specific allegations indicating their active involvement, should be nipped in the bud.
8.1. Applying these legal principles to the facts of the present case, a perusal of the FIR reveals that the allegations against the petitioners are of a general and omnibus nature. The complainant has made sweeping statements about harassment and cruelty by her husband and his family members over trivial domestic issues. There is a conspicuous absence of specific allegations detailing the time, date, and nature of the alleged acts of cruelty or dowry demand against each of the petitioners.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in its recent pronouncement in Sanjay D. Jain & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors., 2025 INSC 1168, while delineating the essential ingredients required to prima facie establish cruelty and harassment within the ambit of Section 498A of the IPC, after adverting to and relying upon its earlier Page 7 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined dictum in Digambar and Another v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 INSC 1019, has, in paragraph 10 of the judgment, enunciated as under:--
"10. A perusal of the FIR and its consideration in entirety indicates that statements of a general nature have been made therein as against the present appellants. The complainant states that on 07.08.2021 when she had gone to her parental house, she had received a call from her mother-in-law raising a demand for clothes and jewellery. When she returned to her matrimonial house on 30.08.2021, she had taken few clothes for the family members. Except this statement, all other statements are of a general nature as well as vague without any particulars. 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."
10. The aforesaid dictum, when applied to the factual matrix of the present case, is found to be wholly unsatisfied. Ergo, the invocation of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, in conjunction with Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, cannot be sustained in law.
10.1 Insofar as the offence under Section 306 IPC is concerned, it becomes imperative to advert to the sine qua non of "abetment," as Page 8 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined defined under Section 107 IPC, for the said charge to stand the scrutiny of law. The statutory exposition of abetment under Section 107 IPC is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"107. Abetment of a thing.--
A person abets the doing of a thing, who-- (First)-- Instigates any person to do that thing; or (Secondly)-- Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or (Thirdly)-- Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing."
11. It clearly postulates that there must be some overt and positive act on the part of the accused amounting to intentional aiding of the deceased, or conduct legally recognized as instigation of such a nature so as to drive the deceased to commit suicide. The law requires something more than a mere casual remark or ordinary discord; it must rise to the level of an act or omission which, by its gravity, compels or goads the deceased to take the extreme step.
12. In this context, a recent pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in J.P. Chavda & Ors v. State of Gujarat, reported in 2024 INSC 960, has comprehensively analyzed the indispensable requirements for establishing the offence under Section 306 IPC. The Court, in paragraphs 16 to 25 of the said judgment, has elaborated upon the constituent ingredients of abetment, the necessity of a proximate and live link between the alleged conduct of the accused and the commission of suicide, and the judicial tests evolved to distinguish mere harassment or discord from culpable Page 9 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined instigation in law. Relevant paras of the same are as under:-
"16. Section 306 of the I.P.C. provides for punishment for the offence of abetment of suicide. It has to be read with Sec. 107 of the I.P.C. which defines the act of 'abetment'. The provisions read as follows :-
"306. Abetment of suicide.--
If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."
"107. Abetment of a thing.--
A person abets the doing of a thing, who-- (First)-- Instigates any person to do that thing; or (Secondly)-- Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or (Thirdly)-- Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing."
Explanation 1.-- A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing.
Explanation 2.-- Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitate the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act."
17. Section 306 of the IPC penalizes those who abet the act of suicide by another. For a person to be charged under this section, the prosecution must establish that the accused contributed to the act of suicide by the deceased. This involvement must satisfy one of the three conditions outlined in Section 107 of the IPC. These conditions include the accused instigated or encouraged the individual to commit suicide, conspiring with others to ensure that the act was Page 10 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined carried out, or engaging in conduct (or neglecting to act) that directly led to the person taking his/her own life.
18. For a conviction under Section 306 of the IPC, it is a well-established legal principle that the presence of clear mens rea--the intention to abet the act--is essential. Mere harassment, by itself, is not sufficient to find an accused guilty of abetting suicide. The prosecution must demonstrate an active or direct action by the accused that led the deceased to take his/her own life. The element of mens rea cannot simply be presumed or inferred; it must be evident and explicitly discernible. Without this, the foundational requirement for establishing abetment under the law is not satisfied, underscoring the necessity of a deliberate and conspicuous intent to provoke or contribute to the act of suicide. The same position was laid down by this Court in S.S. Chheena v. Vijay Kumar Mahajan5, wherein it was observed that:
"25. Abetment involves a mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing. Without a positive act on the part of the accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by the Supreme Court is clear that in order to convict a person under Section 306IPC there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide."
19. To bring a conviction under section 306, IPC it is necessary to establish a clear mens rea to instigate or push the deceased to commit suicide. It requires certain such act, omission, creation of circumstances, or words which would incite or provoke another person to commit suicide. This Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh6, defined the word "instigate" as under:
"20. Instigation is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an act". To satisfy the requirement of instigation (2001) 9 SCC 618 though it is not necessary Page 11 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. The present one is not a case where the accused had by his acts or omission or by a continued course of conduct created such circumstances that the deceased was left with no other option except to commit suicide in which case an instigation may have been inferred. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation."
20. The essential ingredients to be fulfilled in order to bring a case under Section 306, IPC are: -
i. the abetment;
ii. the intention of the accused to aid or instigate
21. Thus, to bring a case under this provision, it is imperative that the accused intended by their act to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. Thus, in cases of death of a wife, the Court must meticulously examine the facts and circumstances of the case, as well as assess the evidence presented. It is necessary to determine whether the cruelty or harassment inflicted on the victim left them with no other option but to end their life. In cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be concrete proof of either direct or indirect acts of incitement that led to the suicide. Mere allegations of harassment are insufficient to establish guilt. For a conviction, there must be evidence of a positive act by the accused, closely linked to the time of the incident, that compelled or drove the victim to commit suicide.
22. It is essential to establish that the death was a result of suicide and that the accused actively abetted its commission. This can involve instigating the victim or engaging in specific actions that facilitated the act. The prosecution must prove beyond doubt that the accused played a definitive role in the abetment. Without clear evidence of an active role in provoking or assisting the suicide, a conviction under Section 306 IPC cannot be sustained.
Page 12 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined
23. The act of abetment must be explicitly demonstrated through actions or behaviors of the accused that directly contributed to the victim's decision to take their own life. Harassment, in itself, does not suffice unless it is accompanied by deliberate acts of incitement or facilitation. Furthermore, these actions must be proximate to the time of the suicide, showcasing a clear connection between the accused's behavior and the tragic outcome. It is only through the establishment of this direct link that a conviction under Section 306 IPC can be justified. The prosecution bears the burden of proving this active involvement to hold the accused accountable for the alleged abetment of suicide. The same position has been laid down by this court in several judgments, such as:
i. M. Mohan v. State, 2011 (3) SCC 626 ii. Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu v. State of West Bengal, 2010 (1) SCC 707 iii. Kamalakar v. State of Karnataka, 2007 SCC Online Kar. 824
24. Therefore, for a conviction under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of direct or indirect acts of incitement to commit suicide. The cause of suicide, especially in the context of abetment, involves complex attributes of human behavior and reactions, (2011) 3 SCC 626 (2010) 1 SCC 707 (2007) SCC OnLine Kar 824 requiring the Court to rely on cogent and convincing proof of the accused's role in instigating the act. Mere allegations of harassment are not enough unless the accused's actions were so compelling that the victim perceived no alternative but to take their own life. Such actions must also be proximate to the time of the suicide. The Court examines whether the accused's conduct, including provoking, urging, or tarnishing the victim's self- esteem, created an unbearable situation. If the accused's actions were intended only to harass or express anger, they might not meet the threshold for abetment or investigation. Each case demands a careful evaluation of facts, considering the accused's intent and its impact on the victim.
Page 13 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined
25. This Court in Ude Singh v. State of Haryana10, held that to convict an accused under Section 306 IPC, the intent or mental state to commit the specific crime must be evident when assessing culpability. It was observed as under:
"16. In cases of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be a proof of direct or indirect (2019) 17 SCC 301 act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. It could hardly be disputed that the question of cause of a suicide, particularly in the context of an offence of abetment of suicide, remains a vexed one, involving multifaceted and complex attributes of human behaviour and responses/reactions. In the case of accusation for abetment of suicide, the court would be looking for cogent and convincing proof of the act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. In the case of suicide, mere allegation of harassment of the deceased by another person would not suffice unless there be such action on the part of the accused which compels the person to commit suicide; and such an offending action ought to be proximate to the time of occurrence. Whether a person has abetted in the commission of suicide by another or not, could only be gathered from the facts and circumstances of each case. 16.1. For the purpose of finding out if a person has abetted commission of suicide by another, the consideration would be if the accused is guilty of the act of instigation of the act of suicide. As explained and reiterated by this Court in the decisions abovereferred, instigation means to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. If the persons who committed suicide had been hypersensitive and the action of accused is otherwise not ordinarily expected to induce a similarly circumstanced person to commit suicide, it may not be safe to hold the accused guilty of abetment of suicide. But, on the other hand, if the accused by his acts and by his continuous course of conduct creates a situation which leads the deceased perceiving no other option except to commit suicide, the case may fall within the four corners of Section 306IPC. If the accused plays an active role in tarnishing the self-esteem and self-Page 14 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined respect of the victim, which eventually draws the victim to commit suicide, the accused may be held guilty of abetment of suicide. The question of mens rea on the part of the accused in such cases would be examined with reference to the actual acts and deeds of the accused and if the acts and deeds are only of such nature where the accused intended nothing more than harassment or snap show of anger, a particular case may fall short of the offence of abetment of suicide. However, if the accused kept on irritating or annoying the deceased by words or deeds until the deceased reacted or was provoked, a particular case may be that of abetment of suicide. Such being the matter of delicate analysis of human behaviour, each case is required to be examined on its own facts, while taking note of all the surrounding factors having bearing on the actions and psyche of the accused and the deceased."
13. Looking to the factual matrix of the case, it is pertinent to note that the absence of the learned advocate for the complainant at the time of hearing is a circumstance that cannot be entirely ignored. While this alone does not furnish a ground for allowing the petition, it does reflect, at the very least, a manifest lack of interest in actively prosecuting the complaint against the present petitioners. Shorn of non-essential details, the factual milieu reveals that the complainant's daughter, Sweety, was married to the petitioners' son, Deepak, approximately four years ago and initially resided with her in-laws. The allegations set forth in the FIR pertain to mental harassment, demand for dowry, and abetment to suicide. Upon meticulous scrutiny of the record, it is manifest that Sweety had been cohabiting with her husband at Vadodara for a substantial period preceding the alleged incident, and no grievance or complaint was ever communicated to the petitioners during that interval.
Page 15 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/14087/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2025 undefined
14. The alleged acts of harassment, if any, are restricted to sporadic telephonic conversations which, in the absence of any corroborative evidence, cannot be construed as cruelty, harassment, or coercion within the ambit of Sections 498A, 306, 507, 114 of the IPC or Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The record further demonstrates that since relocating to Vadodara, Sweety and her husband have been living in peaceful cohabitation, with no reported quarrels or disputes. In absence whereof, the very foundation of the allegations collapses.
15. In view of the foregoing, this Court is of the considered opinion that the allegations leveled against the petitioners are omnibus and general in nature and fail to disclose the commission of any cognizable offence. The implication of the petitioners, who are relatives of the husband and reside separately, appears to be a case of over-implication, clearly designed to harass the entire family. To permit the criminal proceedings to continue against them would constitute a sheer abuse of the process of law and occasion manifest injustice.
16. Consequently, the petition is ALLOWED. The complaint being C.R. No.I-158 of 2017 filed before the JP Road Police Station, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed and set aside, qua the present petitioners.
17. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI,J) MANISH MISHRA Page 16 of 16 Uploaded by MANISH MISHRA(HC01776) on Mon Oct 06 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Oct 06 23:22:27 IST 2025