Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Bombay High Court Upholds FIR in Marital Cruelty Case Post-Divorce: "A Case is Made Out to Proceed Against the Applicants Under Section 498-A of IPC"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Bombay High Court's Aurangabad Bench, comprising Justices Mangesh S. Patil and Shailesh P. Brahme, rejected a plea to quash an FIR and subsequent legal proceedings in a case involving allegations of marital cruelty and deceit. The case, Meer Akbar Ali S/o. Meer Inayat Ali and Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others, highlights the complexities surrounding domestic violence laws post-divorce.

The FIR, filed under Sections 269, 498-A, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), charged the husband (applicant no. 1) and his father (applicant no. 2) with deceit regarding a contagious disease and harassment for dowry. The wife (respondent no. 2) alleged that she was deceived and subjected to harassment, prompting the court to delve into the specifics of the case.

Justice Shailesh P. Brahme observed, "We find that there are allegations of physical and mental harassment caused to the informant by the applicants after she started residing with the applicants." The court emphasized the validity of the allegations based on the period when the marriage was still subsisting.

The applicants argued for the inapplicability of Section 498-A IPC, citing the dissolution of marriage via 'Khula-Nama' on 19.02.2023. However, the court referred to several precedents, including Mohammad Miyan v. State of Uttar Pradesh, to understand the application of domestic cruelty laws post-divorce. The judgment stated, "A victim of harassment contemplated by Section 498-A is a 'woman'... to enable even a divorcee to maintain proceedings in respect of harassment suffered by her when the marriage was subsisting."

This ruling has significant implications for the interpretation of domestic violence laws, especially in the context of dissolved marriages. The Bombay High Court's decision to reject the application for quashing the FIR and subsequent proceedings reaffirms the legal stance on marital cruelty extending beyond the dissolution of marriage. "We have no hesitation to hold that this is not a fit case to exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C," concluded the bench, setting a precedent for similar cases in the future.

Date of Decision: 21-03-2024

Meer Akbar Ali S/o. Meer Inayat Ali and Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others

Latest Legal News