Title: Karnataka High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings based on Trivial Disputes Between Spouses
In a recent ruling, the Karnataka High Court has emphasized that criminal proceedings should not be allowed to proceed based on “glorified trivialities” between spouses and their family members. The court quashed a case that was “recklessly and loosely” laid for offences under Sections 498A, 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The judgment was delivered by Justice M Nagaprasanna, who also cautioned Investigating Officers to exercise caution while invoking Section 504 and 506 of the IPC in such cases. The court expressed concern over complainants dragging all family members into the legal process for even the most minor grievances, without considering the dire consequences of criminal proceedings on the accused individuals.
The case before the court involved a petition filed by a man under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. After 15 years of marriage, the man’s wife lodged a complaint against him and his family members. The complaint alleged that the wife had asked for money to purchase materials for a religious ritual, but her husband refused and insulted her. The charge sheet was filed against the husband under Sections 498A, 504, and 506 of the IPC, excluding the parents.
After evaluating the arguments, the bench observed that the complaint and charge sheet did not indicate any ingredients of the alleged offences. The skirmishes between the husband and wife, which were portrayed as grounds for invoking Section 498A of the IPC, were deemed to be trivial and vague. The court noted that the investigation and charge sheet appeared to be filed without adequate justification, while stressing the importance of scrutinizing allegations in such cases.
The judgment cited several Supreme Court decisions emphasizing the need to quash frivolous cases based on far-fetched and vague allegations. The bench also highlighted the habit of invoking Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC in every offence, calling for a thorough examination of their presence in each case.
Notably, the bench clarified that in the case at hand, the dispute was limited to the husband and wife, and there was no breach of public peace. Accordingly, the charges under Sections 504 and 506 were considered unjustifiably laid against the petitioner.
In a word of advice, the court urged Investigating Officers to exercise caution while invoking Sections 504 and 506 of the IPC, as these offences carry a punishment of up to two years of imprisonment. The court emphasized that bringing such charges without proper grounds should not be taken lightly.
Ultimately, the bench quashed the entire proceedings, deeming them an abuse of the process of law that could result in clear and patent injustice to the petitioner.
I have over 10 years of experience in the cryptocurrency industry and I have been on the list of the top authors on LinkedIn for the past 5 years. I have a wealth of knowledge to share with my readers, and my goal is to help them navigate the ever-changing world of cryptocurrencies.
