Nagpur: Observing that courts “cannot remain oblivious to the disturbing pattern” of matrimonial prosecutions being invoked as pressure tactics, the Nagpur bench of Bombay high court last week quashed an FIR filed under Section 498-A of IPC against a Wardha-based software engineer and his family.Justice Pravin Patil allowed the petition filed by the husband, his parents and relatives, who were accused by his wife. The FIR, registered on July 1, 2024, alleged mental, financial and physical harassment, pressure to terminate pregnancy, and installation of a hidden camera.The couple, both engineers employed in Pune, were married on June 15, 2020. They initially stayed in Washim during the Covid-19 pandemic before relocating to Pune in 2021. The record reflected recurring disputes.On Feb 20, 2024, the husband filed a non-cognisable complaint at Hinjewadi police station, and a medical report noted injuries sustained by him. He filed for divorce on April 15, 2024, expressing apprehension of false complaints.On May 15, 2024, both families executed a mutual settlement contemplating divorce, including a payment of ₹35 lakh. On May 20, 2024, the wife underwent medical termination of pregnancy after both parties signed consent before a gynaecologist in Wardha.Examining WhatsApp transcripts, medical documents and settlement agreement, the court found the chronology largely undisputed. It held that allegations in the FIR were “general and omnibus in nature”, lacking specific dates or grave instances necessary to attract Section 498-A.“In several cases, educated complainants invoke the penal provisions not merely against the spouse but against the entire family of the husband, including aged parents, married sisters, and relatives residing separately, without any proximate or credible allegations of their involvement,” the court observed. “Such indiscriminate invocation of the criminal process trivialises the very object of Section 498-A IPC and erodes its moral and legal force.“Citing Supreme Court rulings cautioning against mechanical prosecution in matrimonial disputes, the court said permitting such cases to proceed without foundational facts results in “prolonged harassment, social stigma, and irreparable prejudice”. It emphasised that courts are “duty-bound to examine the attending circumstances” to determine whether criminal law is being used as “an instrument of coercion or vendetta.“Concluding that the petitioners produced “sound, reasonable and indubitable material,” the court held that continuation of the proceedings would amount to “abuse of process of court,” and quashed the FIR.Key Takeaways The HC said Section 498-A cases are sometimes used as pressure tacticsThe allegations were termed “general and omnibus in nature”WhatsApp chats, medical records and the settlement deed were examinedThe mutual divorce settlement preceded FIR registrationHC cautioned against indiscriminate arraignment of relativesIt warned misuse erodes the moral and legal force of Section 498-AThe proceedings were held an “abuse of process of court”
