Dowry Case | In the absence of specific allegations, mere naming of distant relatives cannot justify prosecution: MP High Court Non-Commencement of Activities Alone Not a Ground for Refusal: Calcutta High Court at Calcutta Affirms Trust Registration, Stating Granting Shifting Permissions is a Quasi-Judicial Act: Delhi High Court Quashes Disciplinary Charges Against MCA Official Jurisdiction Does Not Preclude Transfer to Competent Family Courts: Rules Kerala High Court Madras High Court Acquits Two, Reduces Sentence of Main Accused: Single Injury Does Not Prove Intent to Murder Financial Creditors Retain Right to Pursue Personal Guarantors Post-Resolution Plan: Punjab & Haryana High Court Proper Notice and Enquiry are the Bedrock of Just Administrative Actions: Rajasthan High Court Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Discharge Order in Madan Tamang Murder Case, Orders Trial for Bimal Gurung Review Cannot be Treated Like an Appeal in Disguise: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Tax Review Petition Delhi High Court Orders Interest Payment on Delayed Tax Refunds: ‘Refund Delays Cannot Be Justified by Legal Issues’” Freedom of Press Does Not Exempt Legal Consequences: Kerala High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Journalists in Jail Sting Operation Highest Bidder Has No Vested Right”: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Rejection of SEZ Plot Allotment Indefeasible Right to Bail Arises When Investigation Exceeds Statutory Period: Punjab & Haryana HC Sets Aside Extension Orders in NDPS Case Higher Qualifications Can't Override Prescribed Standards, But Service Deserves Pension: Punjab & Haryana High Court A Mere Breach of Promise Does Not Constitute Criminal Breach of Trust Under Section 406 IPC: Rajasthan High Court Madras High Court Overturns Order Denying IDA Increments, Citing Unfair Settlement Exclusion No Premeditated Intention to Kill: Kerala High Court Reduces Murder Convictions in Football Clash Case Landlord Need Not Be Owner to Seek Eviction: Court Upholds Broad Definition of Landlord under Section 13 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 Delhi High Court Sets Aside Status Quo on Property, Initiates Contempt Proceedings for False Pleadings and Suppression of Facts Calcutta High Court Rules Deceased Driver Qualifies as Third Party, Overrides Policy Limitations for Just Compensation A Litigant Who Pollutes the Stream of Justice Is Not Entitled to Any Relief: Rajasthan High Court Cancels Bail in Murder Case Due to Suppression of Evidence Punjab and Haryana High Court Awards Compensation in Illegal Termination Case, Affirms Forest Department as an 'Industry' Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof: Madras High Court Acquits Man in Double Murder Case Kerala High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings in Loan Repayment Dispute: Manifestly Attended with Mala Fide Intentions Systematic Instruction Essential for ‘Education’ Tax Exemption: Delhi High Court Intent to Deceive Constitutes Forgery: High Court of Calcutta Dismisses Quashing Petition in Fraudulent Property Inclusion Case

Wife Police Officer and Her Father Misused Legal Process with Multiple FIRs on Husband - Supreme Court Imposed 5 Lakh Fine on Wife and Her Father

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Merely because she was a Police Officer, she first managed to get an FIR lodged at Hisar through her father, and thereafter she moved to her hometown at Udaipur and got another complaint lodged by her father within a week. Supreme Court Criticizes Misuse of Legal Process by Police Officer and Her Father

In a striking judgment, the Supreme Court quashed an FIR against Parteek Bansal, highlighting the misuse of the judicial and legal process by a Deputy Superintendent of Police and her father, which involved the lodging of multiple FIRs in different jurisdictions based on the same set of allegations.

The judgment focused on the procedural irregularities and the strategic filing of consecutive FIRs in Hisar and Udaipur, aimed at harassing the appellant, which the court found to be an abuse of the legal process.

 

Parteek Bansal's interaction with the officer through an online platform led to their engagement and subsequent marriage, followed by marital discord. The officer's father, leveraging his daughter’s position, lodged FIRs first in Hisar and then in Udaipur, escalating the legal conflict across state lines, which prompted the legal challenge.

Misuse by Wife and Her Father: The Supreme Court strongly condemned the actions of the respondent No.3, a police officer, and her father for exploiting their knowledge and access to the legal system by filing multiple complaints to unduly harass Bansal.

Chronological Misinterpretation Corrected: The apex court corrected the High Court’s factual inaccuracies regarding the sequence of the complaints, affirming that the Hisar complaint came before the Udaipur complaint.

Abuse of Legal Processes: The Court pointed out the strategic abuse of legal procedures, as the respondents did not withdraw the first complaint nor did they clarify the jurisdictional overlap, thereby allowing the legal processes to be misused for personal grievances.

Decision: The FIR No. 156 of 2015 and all associated proceedings were quashed, citing misuse of the legal process by the officer and her father. The court imposed a significant penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- on the respondents, directing that the amount be split between the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee and the appellant, Parteek Bansal, as compensation and deterrence against similar future abuses.

Date of Decision: April 19, 2024

Parteek Bansal vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

 

Similar News