The Allahabad High Court has quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 457, 448, 506 IPC, Police Station Barra, District Kanpur Nagar, against a woman and her family members in a case that emerged from a matrimonial dispute.

A Single Bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery passed this order while hearing an application under section 482 filed by Akanksha Katiyar and 3 Others.

It is the case of applicants that Applicant-1/Akanksha Katiyar has earlier lodged a FIR dated 30.05.2022 being Case at Police Station Shivrajpur, District Kanpur Nagar against Opposite Party-4/mother-in-law, against her husband and his close relatives for offence under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, alleging that she got married with son of Opposite Party-4 on 28.11.2019 and thereafter she was suffered cruelty with regard to demand of dowry and later on she was sent back to her parental house.

Thereafter on persuasion in the month of November, 2020 she was allowed to live in a room at her matrimonial house but still she suffered cruelty at the hands of her husband, Opposite Party-4 and their relatives. In aforesaid FIR after investigation charge sheet has been filed against said persons.

Kumar Ankit Srivastava, counsel for applicants submitted that Applicant-1 still suffered atrocities and on an occurrence occurred on 14.07.2022, when she was not allowed to enter in her matrimonial house and assaulted, another FIR dated 14.07.2022 being Case was lodged under Section 498A, 342, 504, 506 IPC wherein after investigation charge sheet has also been filed against persons of Complainant side.

Counsel further submitted that in above background, in order to put pressure on applicants, as a counter blast, Opposite Party-4, i.e, mother-in-law of Applicant-1 lodged FIR dated 10.06.2023, i.e, after about 11 months, against applicants being Case under Sections 457, 448 and 506 IPC giving a different version of alleged occurrence took place on 14.07.2022, on which Applicant-1 has already lodged FIR.

Counsel also submitted that investigation was conducted on aforesaid FIR lodged against applicants wherein also charge sheet was filed on 19.08.2023 but only under Section 504, 506 IPC on which Trial Court has taken cognizance by means of impugned order dated 27.10.2023. The charge sheet and summoning order is under challenge in the application.

Counsel for applicants said that the criminal proceedings are the result of a counter blast. On basis of alleged occurrence took place on 14.07.2022 it was the Applicant-1, who lodged prompt FIR wherein after investigation charge sheet has been filed, whereas Opposite Party-4 has filed a belated FIR and as referred above, major allegations with regard to Sections 457, 448 IPC were not found and charge sheet was filed only under Sections 504, 506 IPC.

Counsel further referred statements recorded during investigation that ingredients of offence under Sections 504, 506 IPC are not made out.

Per contra, AGA appearing for State and counsel for Complainant submitted that on basis of statements recorded during investigation and medical report, Investigating Officer has filed charge sheet under above referred offences and Trial Court concerned has rightly taken cognizance, which does not require any interference. They also referred to statements recorded during the investigation.

The Court observed that,

It is not in dispute that relations between parties are not cordial and criminal cases are pending between parties as well as the husband of Applicant-1 has also filed an application under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

It is not in dispute that there is a matrimonial dispute between Applicant-1 and her husband and other relatives. Petition of divorce is also pending. Applicant-1 has filed a prompt FIR of alleged occurrence took place on 14.07.2022 against her husband, Opposite Party-4 and their relatives wherein after investigation charge sheet has been filed, whereas Opposite Party-4 has lodged FIR of the same occurrence giving a different version with a delay of almost 11 months.

Initially FIR was filed under Sections 457, 448 and 506 IPC, however, after investigation allegation qua to offence under Sections 457 IPC (Lurking house trespass or housebreaking by night in order to commit offence punishable with imprisonment) and 448 IPC (Punishment for house trespass) were not found true and charge sheet was filed only under Sections 504, 506 IPC.

The statements of witnesses are verbatim that applicants after breaking lock of house entered inside and when Complainant side reached and it was objected, accused-applicants abused them and extended threat to cause loss to life and such act was repeated also.

"As referred in Mohammad Wajid (supra) in order to make out a case under Section 506 IPC the ingredients of criminal intimidation as mentioned in Section 503 IPC has to be complied with, i.e, the threat caused by applicant must be with intent to cause alarm to that person, or to cause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which that person is legally entitled to do.

However, as referred above, part of the allegation that applicants have committed offence of lurking premises by night and house trespass was not found to be proved. Therefore, the only allegation left is to raise abusive language and cause threat. However, statements are much short of ingredients that applicants had an intention to cause alarm to the Complaint side. Nature of abusive language is not specific. Presence of Applicant-1 at the house was natural and there is no evidence that there was intent. As such ingredients of Section 503 IPC as punishable under Section 506 IPC are not made out.

So far as allegation under Section 504 IPC is concerned, as referred in Mohammad Wajid (supra) that mere abuse, discourtesy, rudeness or insolence, may not amount to an intentional insult within the meaning of Section 504 IPC if it does not have the necessary element of being likely to incite the person insulted to commit a breach of the peace of an offence and as referred above even the nature of abusive language is not on record. There is no statement to the effect that alleged abusive language used by applicants was sufficient to insult the Complainant side to commit a breach of peace of an offence. As such, in this case, even ingredients of Section 504 IPC are absolutely missing.

In aforesaid circumstances, since ingredients of Sections 504, 506 IPC are absolutely missing as well as not only FIR was lodged after about 11 months, without any explanation but on basis of above referred facts the proceedings are counter blast and were initiated with motive for wreaking vengeance, therefore, in the light of A.M Mohan (supra), it is a fit case where in exercise of inherent power the criminal proceedings can be quashed", the Court further observed while allowing the application.

The Court quashed the charge sheet dated 19.08.2023, under Sections 504, 506 IPC, summoning/ cognizance order dated 27.10.2023 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case under Sections 457, 448, 506 IPC, Police Station Barra, District Kanpur Nagar.