LexKAMAL & ORS. versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 4 S.C.R. 2736 : 2025 INSC 504 Kamal & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 2042 of 2025) 16 April 2025 [Manoj Misra and Manmohan, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Appellants sought quashing of FIR in respect of offences u/ss.498-A and s.114 of IPC u/s.482 of CrPC. By the impugned order dated 01.02.2024, the High Court dismissed the petition. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – s.498-A and s.114 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – The appellants 1, 2 and 3 are husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law, respectively, of the second respondent – On 15.05.2019, the first appellant filed for divorce – On 20.07.2019, the second respondent lodged the impugned FIR – Appellants sought quashing of the impugned criminal proceedings – The High Court opined that once the allegations are there, whether they are true or false, would be determined during the trial, therefore the quashing petition is liable to be dismissed – Correctness: Held: What is important, for the purposes of deciding this case, is that in the FIR there is no specific allegation of demand of dowry by the accused – Further, the allegation of harassment of the complainant at the instance of the parents-in-law is limited to extending taunts and custody related issues of minor children – However, there is no disclosure about the nature of those taunts – Admittedly, the second respondent was married to the first appellant in the year 2005 and for last several years since before lodging the FIR, the complainant had been working and staying in rented accommodations at different places – Besides that, the FIR was lodged on 20.07.2019, just three days after service of summons of the divorce proceedings initiated by the first appellant – There are some allegations of assault and of physical and mental torture of the complainant, but they are against the husband – As against the parents-in-law, the allegations are only of extending taunts and of not parting with the money for managing household [2025] 4 S.C.R. 2737 Kamal & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Anr. expenses – Specific details in respect of those taunts have not been disclosed – In the circumstances, no case to proceed against the parents-in-law, namely, the second and third appellant is made out – In so far as the first appellant is concerned, there are allegations of physical and mental torture of the complainant at his behest – Consequently, the case may proceed qua the first appellant. [Paras 11-13] Penal Code, 1860 – s.498-A – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – One party files for divorce and in counterblast other party files FIR –Allegations levelled after many years of marriage – Pedantic approach of the High Court: Held: The High adopted an extremely pedantic approach while dealing with the quashing petition of the appellants – No doubt, in ordinary course, while exercising power u/s.482 of the CrPC, the Court is not required to test the correctness of the allegations, but in matters arising from matrimonial disputes, particularly where the allegations are levelled after many years of marriage and, that too, after one party initiates divorce proceeding against the other, the Court must be circumspect in taking the allegations at their face value – Rather, it must examine, where allegations of mala fides are there, whether those allegations have been levelled with an oblique purpose – More so, while considering the prayer of the relatives of the husband. [Para 13] List of Acts Penal Code, 1860; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. List of Keywords Quashing of FIR; Correctness of the allegations; Matrimonial disputes; Many years of marriage; FIR in counterblast to divorce proceedings; Assault and of physical and mental torture; Parents- in-law. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 2042 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 01.02.2024 of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in CRMA No. 16100 of 2021 2738 [2025] 4 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellants: Mohd Parvez Dabas, Uzmi Jameel Husain, Nadeem Qureshi, Syed Mehdi Imam. Advs. for the Respondents: Prashant Bhagwati, Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Siddhant Sharma, Prafull Bhardwaj. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Order 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal arises from a petition filed by the appellants, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( for short the CrPC), seeking quashing of the
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.