Trademark Pirates Face Legal Wrath: Delhi HC Enforces Radio Mirchi’s IP Rights Swiftly Madras High Court Upholds Extended Adjudication Period Under Customs Act Amid Allegations of Systemic Lapses Disputes Over Religious Office Will Be Consolidated for Efficient Adjudication, Holds Karnataka High Court Motive Alone, Without Corroborative Evidence, Insufficient for Conviction : High Court Acquits Accused in 1993 Murder Case Himachal Pradesh HC Criticizes State for Delays: Orders Timely Action on Employee Grievances Calls for Pragmatic Approach to Desertion and Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Trial Juvenile Tried as Adult: Bombay High Court Validates JJB Decision, Modifies Sentence to 7 Years Retrospective Application of Amended Rules for Redeployment Declared Invalid: Orissa High Court NDPS Act Leaves No Room for Leniency: HC Requires Substantial Proof of Innocence for Bail No Protection Without Performance: MP High Court Denies Relief Under Section 53A of Transfer of Property Act Delays in processing applications for premature release cannot deprive convicts of interim relief: Karnataka High Court Grants 90-Day Parole Listing All Appeals Arising From A Common Judgment Before The Same Bench Avoids Contradictory Rulings: Full Bench of the Patna High Court. Age Claims in Borderline Cases Demand Scrutiny: Madhya Pradesh HC on Juvenile Justice Act Bishop Garden Not Available for Partition Due to Legal Quietus on Declaration Suit: Madras High Court Exclusion of Certain Heirs Alone Does Not Make a Will Suspicious: Kerala High Court Upholds Validity of Will Proof of Delivery Was Never Requested, Nor Was it a Payment Precondition: Delhi High Court Held Courier Firm Entitled to Payment Despite Non-Delivery Allegations Widowed Daughter Eligible for Compassionate Appointment under BSNL Scheme: Allahabad High Court Brutality of an Offence Does Not Dispense With Legal Proof: Supreme Court Overturns Life Imprisonment of Two Accused Marumakkathayam Law | Partition Is An Act By Which The Nature Of The Property Is Changed, Reflecting An Alteration In Ownership: Supreme Court Motor Accident Claim | Compensation Must Aim To Restore, As Far As Possible, What Has Been Irretrievably Lost: Supreme Court Awards Rs. 1.02 Crore Personal Criticism Of Judges Or Recording Findings On Their Conduct In Judgments Must Be Avoided: Supreme Court Efficiency In Arbitral Proceedings Is Integral To Effective Dispute Resolution. Courts Must Ensure That Arbitral Processes Reach Their Logical End: Supreme Court Onus Lies On The Propounder To Remove All Suspicious Circumstances Surrounding A Will To The Satisfaction Of The Court: Calcutta High Court Deeds of Gift Not Governed by Section 22-B of Registration Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Testimony Of  Injured Witness Carries A Built-In Guarantee Of Truthfulness: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Conviction for Attempted Murder POCSO | Conviction Cannot Be Sustained Without Conclusive Proof Of Minority - Burden Lies On The Prosecution: Telangana High Court Credible Eyewitness Account, Supported By Forensic Corroboration, Creates An Unassailable Chain Of Proof That Withstands Scrutiny: Punjab and Haryana High Court Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Bail to Schizophrenic Mother Accused of Murdering Infant Son

No Evidence Against Parents, Claims Against Son Must be Investigated: Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashes FIR against parents in fraudulent marriage and coerced physical relations case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu has quashed the FIR against the parents of Ajay Sharma while maintaining that the investigation against him must proceed. The case involves allegations of deceitful marriage and coerced physical relations under false pretenses, highlighting the nuanced approach of the court in differentiating the roles of various accused individuals.

The case originates from an FIR filed by Miss X, alleging that Ajay Sharma entered into a fraudulent marriage with her and subsequently coerced her into physical relations. Miss X contended that Sharma deceived her by converting to Islam and marrying her under false pretenses, only to later deny the marriage and sever ties. The FIR also implicated Sharma’s parents, accusing them of being complicit in the deceit. The petitioners sought to quash the FIR, claiming the accusations were baseless and motivated by personal vendetta.

The court meticulously examined the allegations against Ajay Sharma and his parents. Justice Rajnesh Oswal found no prima facie case against the parents (petitioners Nos. 1 & 2) but determined that the investigation against Ajay Sharma should continue to validate the claims made by Miss X.

Justice Oswal noted, “The parents cannot be held vicariously responsible for the acts of their son, especially when there are no allegations against them regarding the commission of any offense.” The court concluded that implicating Sharma’s parents appeared to be a tactic to pressure Ajay Sharma, noting the absence of evidence against them in the alleged crimes.

The court referenced significant precedents, including the State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, to clarify when criminal proceedings can be quashed. Justice Oswal emphasized that allegations must be closely scrutinized, especially if they seem driven by personal vendetta.

Justice Oswal reiterated: “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 offense or make out a case against the accused, the FIR can be quashed.”

The allegations against Ajay Sharma included deceitful marriage and coerced physical relations. Miss X claimed that Sharma converted to Islam and married her under false pretenses, only to later deny the marriage. Justice Oswal stressed that these allegations warranted a thorough investigation to determine their validity.

Justice Oswal remarked, “The factual dispute regarding the authenticity of the Nikahnama and the alleged deceitful conduct of petitioner No. 3 necessitates a thorough investigation. The prima facie allegations against petitioner No. 3 involve serious offenses that cannot be dismissed without proper inquiry.”

The court’s decision to quash the FIR against Ajay Sharma’s parents while allowing the investigation against him to continue underscores the judiciary’s balanced approach in handling cases involving personal vendettas and serious criminal allegations. By distinguishing between the accused based on available evidence, the judgment reinforces the legal principles of fairness and thorough investigation in criminal proceedings. This ruling is expected to influence future cases involving similar allegations, highlighting the importance of a meticulous examination of evidence and safeguarding individuals from unjust accusations while ensuring genuine complaints are thoroughly investigated.

Date of Decision: 30.05.2024

Kusum Sharma & Ors. Vs. The Station House Officer, Domana & Ors.

Similar News