High Court Strikes a Blow Against Legal Misuse: ‘Shield Not Weapon’ in Matrimonial Laws

Share:
laws bail money dowry jurisdiction Fails CallsEvidence 2 125 Dowry bankEyewitness matrimonial cheque Employees Evidence Man maintenance guilty bailable system Marriage power Perversity relationship police

In a landmark decision on the 31st of October, 2023, the High Court of Jharkhand, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, has quashed the criminal proceedings against the brother-in-law and sister-in-law of a complainant in a matrimonial dispute case. The court observed the increasing misuse of Section 498-A of the IPC, stating that “the laudable object of punishing cruelty at the hands of husband or his relatives is being misused and the said Section is used as weapon rather than shield by disgruntled wives.”

The petitioners, represented by advocate Ms. Ashma Khanam, were accused of matrimonial torture in a case that cited an alleged occurrence in Dhanbad, while the petitioners resided in Hyderabad. Evidence presented, including travel documents, cast doubt on the complainant’s claims, suggesting that the petitioners could not have been present at the alleged place of occurrence.

The court highlighted the Supreme Court’s perspective, referencing several landmark cases, including Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, to underscore the necessity for judicial scrutiny in such matters. The court’s decision reflects a growing concern over the filing of “complaints under Section 498-AIPC… in the heat of the moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations.”

Justice Dwivedi underscored the importance of protecting the innocent from legal harassment and the detrimental social impact of prolonged trials on familial relationships. The court’s ruling sends a clear message about the need for careful legal consideration in matrimonial disputes, and the dismissal of general and omnibus allegations when specific allegations are not established.

The case has drawn significant attention to the legal complexities surrounding Section 498-A of the IPC and its implications for family law jurisprudence. The proceedings against other accused persons will continue as per the law, as clarified by the court. The advocates representing the state and the opposite party, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava and Mr. Soumitra Baroi respectively, have taken due note of the court’s directives.

Date of Decision: 31.10.2023

Rakesh Rajput @ Rakesh VS The State of Jharkhand

Download Judgment

Share: