Agreement to Sell Creates No Right In Property: Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Trial Court Order Allowing Vendees To Be Impleaded In Partition Suit Uploading Notice on E-Portal Is Not Service in the Eyes of Law: Jharkhand High Court Quashes Reassessment for Breach of Section 148 Notice Requirements She Had Nothing to Gain, No Reason to Lie: Delhi High Court Upholds Murder Conviction of Husband and Son Solely on Dying Declarations of Burnt Woman Delay in Forwarding Material under Section 19(2) Not Fatal When Grounds of Arrest Are Communicated Immediately: Calcutta High Court Upholds ED Arrest in ₹6210 Crore PMLA Case Disqualification Proceedings Are Not Criminal Trials — Speaker Applied a Flawed Yardstick of ‘Beyond Reasonable Doubt’: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Speaker’s Order in Defection Case Against AITC-Backed MLA Sales Tax | Furnace Oil Cannot Be Treated As 'Plant and Machinery' Merely Because It Powers the Boiler: Bombay High Court 28 Years of Service Can’t Be Labelled Temporary: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Regularization of Daily Wage Workers in Municipal Water Supply Clause Creating Perpetual Tenancy Is Void Without Registration – Allahabad High Court Rejects Tenant’s Defense Based On Unregistered Rent Deed Delay of Two Years in Lodging FIR Remains Unexplained — No Justification for Further Custody: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail Dismissal of Cheque Bounce Complaint for Default is Acquittal — Victim Can Appeal Without Seeking Leave: Punjab & Haryana High Court Where Victim Is Last Seen With Accused and Dies Soon After, Burden Shifts on Accused Under Section 106 Evidence Act and Section 29 POCSO: Patna High Court Registered Sale Agreement Can Be a Mask for Loan Security, Not a Binding Promise of Sale: Madras High Court Declares Oral Evidence Admissible to Expose Real Intention Personal Hearing Must Be Read Into Every Disciplinary Proceeding, Even If Rules Are Silent: Kerala High Court Cheating Allegations Cannot Be Brushed Aside Merely Because Civil Suits Are Pending: Telangana High Court Cyber Fraud Cannot Be Treated as a Mere Private Dispute Resolved by Money: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Despite Compromise Presumption Under Section 113-B Cannot Arise Without Proof of Dowry Harassment Soon Before Death: Allahabad High Court Upholds Acquittal in Dowry Death Case Conviction Cannot Rest on Recovery Alone from Shared Space: Supreme Court Acquits Man Accused of Murder Expert Opinion Is Weak Evidence – Dying Declaration Without Corroboration Cannot Convict: Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Man Accused of Wife’s Murder Order VIII Rule 1 Is Directory in Non-Commercial Suits—Striking Off Defence Without Considering Section 8 Arbitration Application Not Sustainable: Punjab and Haryana High Court Title Perfected Under Tenancy Act Cannot Be Reopened by Civil Court Without Proof of Fraud: Bombay High Court Dismisses Partition Suit Harassment Alone Isn’t Enough — There Must Be a Direct and Proximate Act That Drives Suicide: Gujarat High Court Acquits Accused in Section 306 IPC Case Police Report Is Not a Valid Complaint under Section 195 CrPC; Cognizance for Section 188 IPC Offence Without Public Servant’s Complaint Is Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court Assessee Cannot Be Asked To Prove 'Source of Source' For Pre-Amendment Loans: Delhi High Court Affirms ITAT Deletion of ₹10 Cr Addition Under Section 68 Statutory Remedies Cannot Be Bypassed by Filing a Writ Petition Years Later: Supreme Court Dismisses Delayed Challenge to Revenue Auction

Omnibus Allegations Cannot Sustain Criminal Trial: Calcutta High Court Quashes 498A Proceedings Against Husband’s Relatives for Vague and General Allegations

31 July 2025 4:31 PM

By: sayum


“Criminal proceedings cannot be allowed to continue where allegations are omnibus, vague and without specifics; law does not permit oppression of innocent relatives under the guise of matrimonial disputes,” in a detailed and decisive ruling e Calcutta High Court quashed criminal proceedings against three relatives-in-law of a woman, noting that the allegations were “general, baseless and bereft of particulars.” The Court, applying the celebrated Bhajan Lal guidelines, held that continuation of the criminal trial would be an “abuse of process of law.”

The judgment comes as a significant reaffirmation of judicial scrutiny in criminal cases arising out of matrimonial discord, emphasizing the need for specific allegations to sustain prosecution under Section 498A IPC.

“In Absence of Specific Cruelty, Family Members Cannot Be Dragged Into Criminal Prosecution” — High Court Quashes Charge Sheet Against Husband’s Relatives

The case arose out of Amdanga PS Case No. 160/2020, where the complainant, Tapati Das, had alleged that since her marriage in 2017 she was subjected to mental and physical cruelty by her husband and in-laws, and was driven out from her matrimonial home. An FIR under Section 498A IPC was filed against her husband, along with her brothers-in-law and a sister-in-law, the petitioners in this case.

However, the Court, after examining the case diary, statements under Section 161 CrPC, and the injury report, found no specific allegation against the petitioners. Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta noted:
“Mere vague, omnibus and bald allegations have been made against the present petitioners with regard to physical and mental torture; therefore it does not constitute offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.”

Domestic Violence Allegations Confined Only to Husband — A Key Reason for Quashment

The Court took particular note of the fact that the complainant had filed proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act only against her husband, without any reference to the petitioners. This omission, the Court said, was a glaring indicator that the complaint against other relatives was an afterthought.

Justice Gupta observed:
“When a complainant herself excludes relatives-in-law in her domestic violence complaint, it speaks volumes about the veracity of omnibus allegations in the FIR.”

“Vague Allegations Do Not Constitute Offence”: Supreme Court Principles Applied

Relying on recent authoritative Supreme Court judgments including Dara Lakshmi Narayana v. State of Telangana (2024 SCC OnLine SC 7), and Tabrez Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Justice Gupta reiterated the principle:
“A mere reference to the names of family members in a criminal case arising out of a matrimonial dispute, without specific allegations indicating their active involvement, should be nipped in the bud.”

The Court highlighted the rising misuse of Section 498A IPC, cautioning against its employment as a tool of harassment.

“Case Falls Within Bhajan Lal Guidelines”: Court Exercises Inherent Power under Section 482 CrPC

Applying the landmark judgment in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, the Court ruled that the case fell squarely within categories (1), (3), and (5) of the Bhajan Lal guidelines, warranting exercise of inherent jurisdiction to prevent miscarriage of justice.

“Even if the allegations are taken at face value, no prima facie offence is made out against the petitioners,” the Court concluded, invoking its powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings.

Proceedings Against Husband to Continue Independently

Clarifying the scope of its judgment, Justice Gupta made it explicit:
“The complaint against the husband of the opposite party no. 2, namely, Joydeb Das, will be decided on its own merits… this Court does not examine the case of her husband.”

This distinction ensured that while innocent relatives were protected from harassment, the complainant’s grievance against her husband would still undergo judicial scrutiny before the trial court.

Quashing of Charge Sheet and All Proceedings Against Relatives-in-Law

In conclusion, the Court allowed the criminal revision and quashed the criminal proceedings, observing:
“Continuation of the criminal proceeding against the present petitioners would result in an abuse of process of law and deserves to be quashed to secure ends of justice.”

The judgment underscores the judiciary's commitment to safeguarding innocent individuals from malicious prosecution while upholding the sanctity of criminal proceedings.

Date of Decision: 9th July 2025

Latest Legal News