In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings against in-laws wrongly implicated under Sections 498A, 377, and 506 IPC. The Court held that sweeping, vague allegations without specific details cannot form the basis of prosecution. This judgment sends a clear message—criminal law cannot be a tool for settling personal scores or harassing entire families.
Brief Facts of the Case
- The complainant married Piyush in July 2021.
- She alleged that her in-laws demanded dowry and harassed her, while her husband subjected her to unnatural sexual acts and threats.
- FIR was filed under Sections 498A, 377, and 506 IPC.
- The in-laws sought quashing, but the Bombay High Court refused.
- They approached the Supreme Court for relief.
Legal Provisions Involved
- 498A IPC – Cruelty by husband or relatives.
- 377 IPC – Unnatural sexual offences.
- 506 IPC – Criminal intimidation.
- 34 IPC – Common intention.
- 482 CrPC – Inherent power to quash proceedings.
Arguments
In-Laws (Petitioners):
- FIR lacked specific allegations; only omnibus statements were made.
- No ingredients of Sections 498A, 377, or 506 were satisfied.
- Allegations of unnatural sex & threats applied only to the husband, not them.
State & Complainant (Respondents):
- Complaint disclosed harassment and dowry demands.
- One instance of demand (clothes and jewellery) was mentioned.
- At this stage, quashing would be premature; trial should test evidence.
Court’s Observations
- FIR contained mostly vague and general allegations.
- Only one instance of demand was cited, which by itself did not amount to “cruelty” under Section 498A.
- Sections 377 and 506 allegations were solely against the husband.
- Continuing proceedings against in-laws would amount to abuse of process.
- Applied the Bhajan Lal principles—general accusations cannot justify criminal prosecution.
Conclusion of the Judgment
- FIR and charge-sheet against the in-laws were quashed.
- Proceedings against the husband will continue separately.
Comments from the authour of this website
This judgment shines a harsh light on the ugly reality—laws like 498A are being twisted into tools of vengeance. Families are being torn apart not by cruelty, but by false cases filed in the heat of matrimonial disputes. Here, elderly parents and a sister were forced to stand as criminals without a single concrete allegation against them.
It is alarming how casually men’s families are dragged into these cases, as if being related to a husband is itself a crime. Such reckless misuse doesn’t just destroy innocent lives, it also mocks the plight of real victims by turning every marital conflict into a criminal case. When the law is stretched this way, men and their families live under constant fear that a single FIR can ruin their dignity, finances, and peace of mind.
This is not empowerment—it is legalised harassment. If society is serious about equality, then misuse of law must be condemned as strongly as genuine abuse is punished.
Final Thoughts
The Supreme Court’s ruling is a reminder that justice cannot survive on vague words and blanket accusations. The law must separate truth from vendetta, and courts must act as a shield for the innocent.
For too long, false cases have been brushed aside as “exceptions.” But each false case is a real family destroyed, a real man humiliated, and a real injustice done. Until we acknowledge this reality, we will continue to punish the innocent along with the guilty.
It’s time we say it plainly: protecting women cannot mean criminalising men by default. The fight for justice must be balanced, fair, and rooted in truth.
Read Complete Judgement Here