Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

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

Similar News