New Delhi: Underlining that a woman’s in-laws cannot be prosecuted for simply asking her to adjust to the situation or for supporting her husband, the Supreme Court has quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against the in-laws alleging cruelty, dowry and domestic violence.
In doing so, a two-judge bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh noted on Monday that the allegations made by the wife against her in-laws were essentially “broad and sweeping assertions”. These allegations included that the in-laws would support her husband, harass her, or advise her to adjust or return to her parental home.
In prosecutions arising out of matrimonial disputes, the allegations against each accused “must be specific, distinct and supported by prima facie material” indicating their active involvement in the alleged acts of cruelty, harassment or unlawful demand of dowry, the court said.
“However, no distinct incident, date, specific demand, act of physical cruelty, unlawful intimidation or active participation in the alleged harassment has been clearly attributed to any of the appellants individually,” the court ruled in its 65-page judgment, dubbing these allegations as “omnibus” or generalised.
Without specific allegations, continuation of criminal proceedings against the in-laws would amount to an abuse of the legal process, it said.
Clarifying that criminal law cannot be allowed to become an instrument for venting personal grievances or settling familial scores in the absence of clear, specific and legally sustainable allegations, the court added that a heightened degree of caution must be exercised when allowing criminal prosecution against the husband’s relatives who are being accused due to their relationship with him.
Advocate Nipun Saxena, who appeared for the in-laws, said that the case has a very “chequered history”. “The wife went to her parental home in Guna and filed a complaint against her in-laws, who were living in Shivpuri district instead. However, the Domestic Violence Act says you can file a complaint against those who are living in the same or shared household, not those who are hundreds of metres away,” Saxena told ThePrint.
Interestingly, the bench said there could be a situation where new evidence might come into light, leading to the identification of new accused persons. “Even if we quash the case today, and new evidence surfaces tomorrow, the trial court would be within power to summon them as additional accused, the SC has ruled,” Saxena told ThePrint.
The most clinching finding is the court’s mandate that allegations have to be specific as in this case, the wife’s claims were generic, and did not mention the date, place, occasion, and who said what, Saxena said.
Also Read: India’s dowry laws are most powerful in the world. They’re not enough
The case
The top court made these remarks while acting on the case of the woman who got married in November 2019. The husband was posted as a Revenue Inspector at Madhya Pradesh’s Sheopur district. She said that her family gave him Rs 31 lakh in cash and Rs 10 lakh worth of gold jewellery. Despite this, he allegedly started harassing her, and asked her to bring more money.
The woman alleged that her in-laws, including her sister- and mother in-laws, subjected her to mental and physical cruelty and told her to go live with her parents instead, if more dowry is not given.
In September 2022, a fight broke out following which she approached the police and told them that her husband would leave her at the in-laws house in Shivpuri.
The woman then filed an FIR against the husband and his family in January 2023, alleging domestic violence, dowry demands and cruelty, which led a Guna court to initiate domestic violence proceedings. After the Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to set aside the FIR, the in-laws moved the Supreme Court in November 2024.
After looking at the allegations and counter allegations, the SC said the parties had a “deeply strained marital relationship”, marred by allegations of cruelty, incompatibility and even adultery. While the present case was still pending before the court, the couple had been granted divorce by a family court in 2023.
In such circumstances, the court noted, continuing proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act against the in-laws, “in the absence of specific and substantiated allegations against them as of now,” would serve no useful purpose.
Making this clear that it is conscious of genuine cases of cruelty and domestic abuse, the top court said, “Acts of emotional, verbal, economic or physical abuse within the domestic sphere may not always leave behind readily available evidence or independent witnesses”.
However, the absence of evidence cannot by itself be a ground to disbelieve a victim. “It is precisely to address this social evil that legislations such as the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and the penal provisions relating to cruelty and dowry harassment have been enacted with wide amplitude and protective intent,” the court said in its 25 May ruling.
However, the bench ruled that the courts must simultaneously ensure that the rigours of criminal law are not indiscriminately extended to every family member without a clear factual foundation.
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: Evil of dowry will continue unless women are economically independent: Kanak Mukherjee