498A Misuse| Wife Drags Husband & Relatives Into Dowry Harassment Case; Calcutta HC Quashes Proceedings as Medical Records Contradict Claims

WEST BENGAL: The Calcutta High Court has quashed a dowry harassment and cruelty case against a husband and four family members after finding serious weaknesses in the allegations, including vague accusations against relatives and medical records contradicting claims of physical violence.

Read Also:- Dowry Harassment Case | “Common Practice To Implicate Husband’s Family”: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Wife’s Plea Against In-Laws Over “Bald And Omnibus” Allegations

In a judgment dated 5 October 2026, Justice Uday Kumar held that continuing the criminal trial against Jagat Chandra Nandi and his relatives would amount to an abuse of the legal process.

Jagat Chandra Nandi married Supriya Nandi under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, on 11 November 2019. A traditional Hindu marriage ceremony followed on 11 December 2019. The couple initially lived at Chapra before shifting to a flat in Purulia.

The wife alleged that her family had given Rs. 3 lakh in cash, 20 bhori of gold, furniture, and financial assistance to purchase the flat. She claimed that her husband and his family later demanded another Rs. 5 lakh and subjected her to physical and mental cruelty.

She further alleged that an assault on her abdomen during pregnancy led to a medical termination on 9 January 2020. She also accused the family of attempting to suffocate her with a pillow on 11 June 2020.

On 4 July 2020, she registered an FIR under Sections 498A, 325, 307, 313, 406, 506 and 34 IPC, along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

Read Also:- Section 498a: Myth Buster | FAQs on 498A | Detailed Information on 498A IPC

Following the investigation, the police filed a charge sheet under Sections 498A, 325, 406, 506, and 34 IPC, and the Dowry Prohibition Act. Meanwhile, the husband filed a divorce case in 2023.

The husband and his relatives approached the High Court under Section 482 CrPC, seeking to quash the criminal proceedings.

Their lawyers argued that the allegations were false and lacked specific details. Two relatives lived approximately 12 kilometres away, while two others lived 56 kilometres and 41 kilometres away from the matrimonial home.

The husband also produced medical records showing treatment for recurrent pneumothorax, fissure in ano and umbilical hernia. He underwent treatment at hospitals in Bankura, Vellore, and Durgapur during the relevant period.

Read Also:- No Specific Cruelty, No Proof Of Dowry Demand, No Entrustment Of Property: Delhi Court Discharges Husband And Entire Family In 498A/406 Case

The State and the wife's counsel opposed quashing, arguing that the allegations and medical evidence should be examined during trial.

The High Court referred to State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, Geeta Mehrotra v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, highlighting the need for specific allegations before prosecuting relatives in matrimonial disputes.

Quoting the Supreme Court's observations in Preeti Gupta, the judgment reproduced:

"32. It is common experience that most complaints under Section 498-A IPC are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues, without proper deliberation. We come across a large number of such complaints which are not even bona fide and are filed with oblique motive."

The Court found that the allegations against the extended relatives were general and vague, without details of their individual roles, dates or specific acts.

It further held that the husband's medical records seriously undermined the allegations of violent physical assault during the relevant period. The Court considered the documentary evidence sufficiently reliable to justify intervention without continuing the trial.

The Bench also noted differences between the financial claims in the FIR and matrimonial proceedings, including a later claim of Rs. 14.30 lakh, along with the 23-day delay in lodging the FIR after the wife left the matrimonial home.

Read Also:- Consensual Pre-Marital Relationship Can’t Be A Black Mark On Man’s Character: Supreme Court Allows Police Appointment

Considering these circumstances together, the High Court concluded that the criminal proceedings had been used as an instrument of pressure and retaliation, creating unjustified harassment for the husband and his family.

Accordingly, the Court allowed CRR 5337 of 2025 and quashed the entire criminal proceedings against all five petitioners, ending the prosecution arising from Arambagh Women Police Station Case No. 40 of 2020.

EXPLANATORY TABLE OF LAWS AND SECTIONS

CASE DETAILS

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• 498A Case Quashed: Calcutta High Court quashed the dowry harassment case against the husband and four relatives.
• Vague Allegations Not Enough: Relatives cannot face criminal prosecution merely because their names appear in matrimonial complaints.
• Medical Evidence Protected Husband: Hospital records contradicted the wife's allegations of serious physical assault.
• Misuse of Criminal Law: The Court found that the prosecution was used as a tool of pressure, retaliation and harassment.
• Justice for Husband and Family: The judgment reinforces that criminal law cannot be used to settle matrimonial scores without credible allegations and supporting evidence.