Dismisses Quashing Petition of FIR Alleging Harassment and Dowry Demands No Veiled Object Appears Implicating Falsely – MP HC

In a recent judgment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, before Hon’ble Shri Justice Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, dismissed a petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), seeking the quashing of an FIR. The FIR was registered against the applicants for offenses under Section 498-A (cruelty to married women), 294 (obscene acts and songs), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

High court stated, “On perusal of the material available in the case diary and also from the averments made in the FIR, it is clear that a specific case has been disclosed against the applicants and no veiled object appears implicating the applicants falsely.” The court further emphasized that at the preliminary stage of criminal proceedings, the defense raised by the applicants cannot be considered, and the court's role is limited to determining whether the allegations in the FIR disclose a cognizable offense.

The petitioners, represented by their advocate, argued that the allegations made by the respondent, who is the wife of one of the applicants, were baseless. They contended that the respondent was quarrelsome and had a short-tempered nature, causing disturbances in the matrimonial home. However, the court rejected these arguments, stating that the defense cannot be examined at the preliminary stage and that the allegations made within eight months of the marriage cannot be deemed false or baseless.

The court highlighted that the investigation was still ongoing, and as no charge sheet had been filed, it would not be appropriate to quash the proceedings at that stage. It referred to previous judgments, cautioning against quashing FIRs without prima facie evidence, especially in cases involving allegations of harassment in matrimonial disputes.

The judgment also distinguished a cited case, Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam Vs. State of Bihar, noting that the present case involved specific allegations against the husband, mother-in-law, and father-in-law, unlike the general and omnibus allegations in the Kahkashan Kausar case.

High Court that the allegations in the FIR disclosed a cognizable offense, and since the investigation was still ongoing, the quashing of the FIR would not be justified. The court emphasized that its role was not to appreciate the evidence or merits of the case at this stage, but to permit the investigating agency to continue its investigation to collect the truth.

DATE OF DECISION: 15th June, 2023

SHUBHAM vs THE STATE OF M.P.