In a significant judgment dated 9th June 2025, the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) in Criminal Application No. 1565 of 2023 DATED : 9th JUNE, 2025 has once again drawn attention to the growing trend of misuse of criminal provisions, particularly Section 498A of the IPC, by wives to implicate the entire family of the husband in matrimonial disputes. The Court partially allowed the application filed under Section 482 CrPC, quashing criminal proceedings against relatives of the husband while upholding charges against the husband.
The case arose out of a complaint filed by the wife, alleging mental and physical cruelty and dowry harassment. Based on her police report, offences under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 IPC, and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, were registered against eight applicants, including the husband and his relatives.
The High Court, after reviewing the facts, observed that the allegations against the husband (Applicant No.1) were serious in nature and required legal scrutiny. However, the allegations against the other applicants—relatives of the husband—were general, vague, and devoid of specific instances. There was a clear absence of dates, places, or manner of alleged acts, making it evident that no prima facie case was made out against them.
The Court noted that the wife had left the matrimonial home without intimation in 2022, and divorce proceedings initiated by the husband were pending. Interestingly, the complaint was lodged after the husband initiated divorce, raising a suspicion of mala fide intent.
In a noteworthy observation, the Court remarked:
“It is noticed that nowadays in proceedings arising out of matrimonial discord, there is a tendency of the wife to implicate the husband and his family members in the web of crime. The police complaint is considered in such matters as the only panacea to teach a lesson to the family members of the husband.”
Such sweeping and generalized allegations, unsupported by concrete evidence, lead to unwarranted harassment of innocent family members who are dragged into prolonged litigation and criminal trials, causing irreparable mental and reputational damage.
In its final order, the Hon’ble Bench comprising Justice Pravin S. Patil and Justice Anil S. Kilor:
- Rejected the application with respect to the husband (Applicant No.1), allowing prosecution to continue against him.
- Quashed the proceedings against Applicants No. 2 to 8 (i.e., the in-laws and extended family), citing lack of prima facie material and specificity in allegations.
The decision is a reaffirmation of the judicial safeguards against misuse of Section 498A IPC, a provision originally enacted to protect women from cruelty and dowry harassment but often invoked indiscriminately to settle personal scores.
This ruling aligns with earlier Supreme Court observations in Rajesh Sharma v. State of UP (2017) and K. Subba Rao v. State of Telangana (2018), where concerns about the mechanical arrest and blanket criminalisation of family members were flagged, and guidelines were laid down to prevent misuse.
Takeaway for Legal Practitioners and Policymakers
This judgment reinforces the need for:
- Strict scrutiny at the stage of cognizance in matrimonial complaints.
- Advocates to discourage frivolous and vindictive litigation, especially when allegations lack factual backing.
- Policymakers to consider balancing legislative reforms that ensure protection for genuine victims while preventing harassment of innocents.
The Bombay High Court’s verdict is a welcome reminder that criminal law must not become a tool of vengeance, and courts must tread cautiously where family dynamics are entangled with legal proceedings.
Author Bio
