Can elderly in-laws be forced to face trial even after a full and final compromise? The Rajasthan High Court held that senior citizens cannot be subjected to endless criminal trials once the matrimonial dispute has been settled and the settlement has been honoured.
JAIPUR: In a judgment dated May 21, 2026, Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand of the Rajasthan High Court quashed criminal proceedings u/s 498A IPC against a 65-year-old father-in-law and a 62-year-old mother-in-law, observing that courts cannot be used to harass people after matrimonial disputes have already been settled.
The dispute arose from a marriage solemnised on November 27, 2009. Following differences between the couple, the wife lodged an FIR in 2013 against her husband and his family members. After investigation, charges were framed against the husband and his parents under Sections 498A and 406 IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
While the criminal trial was pending, the husband obtained a divorce decree from the Family Court in Jaipur in 2019. The wife challenged the decree before the High Court, but the parties later settled the dispute. Under the compromise, the husband agreed to pay ₹20 lakh as permanent alimony. After receiving the amount, the wife’s appeal was dismissed on December 12, 2024, and the decree of divorce was formally prepared on February 17, 2025.
However, despite accepting the settlement and obtaining the benefits of the compromise, the complainant neither appeared before the trial court to record her evidence nor withdrew the criminal proceedings. The High Court noted that since 2018, neither she nor her witnesses had entered the witness box despite repeated summons.
Taking note of this conduct, the Court observed that the complainant:
“Having received the decree of divorce from the husband without contest on the basis of the terms of the compromise, cannot now be allowed to go back upon their proclaimed stand and take a somersault.”
Justice Dhand said the case reflected a troubling pattern where matrimonial disputes are settled, but criminal proceedings are kept alive to force the other side to continue suffering the burden of litigation. The Court remarked that:
“This clearly indicates a reverse trend where the wife despite having compromised the dispute with her husband and on that basis obtained decree of divorce by mutual consent, yet want the prosecution against the husband and his family members to continue so that they are compelled to go through the ordeal of attending the protracted proceedings in the criminal cases.”
The Court further found that the settlement was intended to bring a complete end to the dispute. It observed:
“From the agreements entered into between the parties and which are confirmed by her in Court, no doubt is left that this was a compromise/settlement for divorce by consent decree as well as for quashing the criminal proceedings.”
Refusing to honour that understanding, the Court held:
“By denying to honour that agreement, she is certainly misusing the process of the Court.”
Justice Dhand also reiterated that judicial proceedings should not be converted into instruments of pressure, observing that:
“The court proceedings ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution.”
Concluding that allowing the elderly parents-in-law to continue facing trial after the settlement would serve no purpose except harassment, the High Court held that:
“Continuation of the proceedings against the petitioners tantamount to abuse of process of law.”
And quashed the criminal proceedings pending against them.
The husband, however, did not receive the benefit of quashing through this petition, as he had not approached the Court seeking such relief.
EXPLANATORY TABLE: LAWS AND SECTIONS INVOLVED
| Law/Section | Purpose | How Applied in This Case |
| Section 302 IPC | Punishes murder | Mentioned in the original FIR No. 327/2013 but not included in the final chargesheet against the petitioners. |
| Section 323 IPC | Punishes voluntarily causing hurt | Part of the original FIR allegations. |
| Section 341 IPC | Punishes wrongful restraint | Included in the FIR allegations. |
| Section 354 IPC | Relates to assault or criminal force against a woman intending to outrage modesty | Mentioned in the FIR. |
| Section 506 IPC | Punishes criminal intimidation | Included in the FIR. |
| Section 114 IPC | Liability of an abettor present when the offence is committed | Mentioned in the FIR. |
| Section 406 IPC | Criminal breach of trust, often invoked for alleged misappropriation of stridhan | Charges were framed against the husband and parents-in-law. |
| Section 498A IPC | Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband | Main matrimonial offence involved in the case. |
| Section 120B IPC | Criminal conspiracy | Mentioned in the FIR allegations. |
| Section 4, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 | Punishes demand for dowry | Charges were framed against the accused persons. |
| Section 13, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 | Divorce provision | Husband obtained divorce under this provision. |
| Section 482 CrPC | Inherent powers of the High Court to prevent abuse of process and secure justice | Basis for seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. |
CASE DETAILS
- Case Title: Parents-in-Law vs. State
- Court: High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench
- Bench: Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand
- Case Number: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 4251/2022
- Date of Judgment: 21 May 2026
- Counsels:
- For Petitioners: Mr. Neeraj K. Tiwari
- For the State: Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore(PP), and Mr. Gaurav Gupta (AGA)
- For Respondent No. 2: Mr. Sapan Soni
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- Accepting a full and final settlement should bring an end to litigation, not become a stepping stone to continue criminal proceedings against the other side.
- Elderly parents should not be forced to spend years attending courts after a matrimonial dispute has already been resolved through divorce and compensation.
- The judgment reinforces that criminal proceedings cannot be used as a tool of pressure, revenge, or post-settlement harassment.
- Courts must carefully examine matrimonial allegations and distinguish genuine grievances from cases pursued with an oblique motive.
- Protection laws are necessary, but their misuse weakens faith in the justice system and causes immense emotional, financial, and social damage to innocent families.
This Could Change Your Case-Get FREE Legal Advice-Click Here!
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the Indian courts and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of “ShoneeKapoor.com” or its affiliates. This article is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content provided is not legal advice, and viewers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Viewer discretion is advised.
