Supreme Court Quashes Dowry Harassment FIR Against Husband’s Relatives

The Supreme Court of India, in its judgment dated January 30, 2024, quashed an FIR against the relatives of a husband accused of dowry harassment and cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court ruled that the allegations against the husband’s family were general and lacked specific details, leading to the conclusion that the case was filed as a means of harassment.

Background of the Case

The case involved a marital dispute between Safiya Bano alias Shakira (appellant) and her husband. The wife filed an FIR (No. 321 of 2019) at Thakurganj Police Station, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, against her husband and his family members under Sections 498A (cruelty by husband or relatives), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult), 494 (marrying again during the lifetime of spouse), and 377 (unnatural offenses) of the IPC.

The accused family members filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) before the Allahabad High Court to quash the FIR. The High Court rejected their plea on July 24, 2019, stating that the FIR disclosed a prima facie case under Section 498A IPC.

Challenging this order, the accused approached the Supreme Court.

Key Legal Issues

Whether the allegations against the husband’s family members were specific and sufficient to sustain a prosecution under Section 498A IPC.
Whether the FIR was filed as a retaliatory measure after the husband sought restitution of conjugal rights.
Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the petition to quash the FIR.

Petitioner’s Arguments (Husband’s Family)

The appellants, represented by counsel Uzmi Jameel Husain, argued that:

The allegations in the FIR were vague and did not specify how each family member was involved in cruelty or harassment.
The case was a counterblast to the husband’s petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
The wife had initially agreed to a settlement but later backed out and filed the FIR to harass the husband’s family.
The Supreme Court, in previous rulings, has discouraged the misuse of Section 498A IPC to falsely implicate relatives of the husband.

Respondent’s Arguments (State of Uttar Pradesh)

The State of Uttar Pradesh, represented by counsel Shaurya Sahay, contended that:

The FIR contained sufficient allegations indicating cruelty and dowry demands.
The wife’s allegations must be taken at face value at this stage of investigation.
The High Court had correctly observed that the ingredients of Section 498A IPC were met.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court analyzed the FIR and the submissions made by both parties.

1. General Allegations Against Husband’s Family

“The allegations made against the present appellants, who are the husband’s relatives, are general in nature, wherein it is stated that the appellants harassed her and demanded dowry. No specific allegation of ill-treatment is made against any of the appellants.”

The Court found that the FIR lacked specific details about the role of each accused family member.

2. Retaliatory FIR After Conjugal Rights Petition

“In the appeal, a specific statement has been made to the effect that after a decree for restitution of conjugal rights was filed by the husband, the FIR has been filed only in order to harass the husband and his entire family.”

The Court observed that the wife filed the FIR only after the husband sought legal intervention to restore their marriage.

3. Prior Settlement Agreement

“It appears that there was an attempt to settle the matter, as can be seen from the agreement of settlement between the husband and respondent No.2 (wife).”

The Court noted that the wife had initially agreed to a settlement but later withdrew and proceeded with the FIR.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and quashed the proceedings against the husband’s family members, ruling:

“In the result, the appeal is allowed. The proceedings arising out of FIR No. 321 of 2019 dated 24th April 2019 registered at Police Station Thakurganj, District-Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh qua the present appellants shall stand quashed and set aside.”

However, the Court clarified that proceedings against the husband would continue as per the law.

Key Takeaways from the Judgment

Courts must scrutinize vague and general allegations against relatives in dowry harassment cases.
Filing an FIR after a restitution of conjugal rights petition raises concerns of misuse.
Section 498A IPC must not be used as a tool to harass the husband’s family without specific evidence.
Prior settlement agreements and the conduct of parties play a crucial role in evaluating matrimonial disputes.

This judgment reinforces the need for a balanced approach in dowry harassment cases, ensuring that genuine cases proceed while protecting innocent family members from false implications.

Petitioner Name: Safiya Bano alias Shakira & Ors..
Respondent Name: State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Sanjay Karol.
Place Of Incident: Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 30-01-2024.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: safiya-bano-alias-sh-vs-state-of-uttar-prade-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-30-01-2024.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Domestic Violence
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Judgment by B R Gavai
See all petitions in Judgment by Sanjay Karol
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Quashed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments January 2024
See all petitions in 2024 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category