Ravi Kumar & Ors vs State Of H.P. & Anr on 23 July, 2026

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Ravi Kumar & Ors vs State Of H.P. & Anr on 23 July, 2026

Author: Sandeep Sharma

Bench: Sandeep Sharma

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

.

Cr.MMO No.1000 of 2024

Date of Decision: 23.07.2026
_______________________________________________________
Ravi Kumar & Ors. …….Petitioners
Versus

State of H.P. & Anr. …..Respondents
_______________________________________________________
Coram:

of
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? 1 Yes.

For the Petitioners: rt Mr. Divya Raj Singh, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol & Mr. Vishal Panwar,
Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi

Chauhan & Mr. Anish Banshtu, Deputy
Advocates General, for respondent No.1-
State.

Mr. Mohit Jaitak & Mr. Abhishek Nagta,
Advocates, for respondent No.2.

_______________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral):

By way of the instant petition filed under Section 528 of

the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, prayer has been made on

behalf of the petitioners-accused (in short ‘accused’) for quashing of

FIR No.178 of 2023 dated 28.06.2023, registered under Sections 498-

A, 406, 404, 506 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code at Police Station

Haroli, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, as well as consequent

proceedings i.e. Police Challan No.337/2023, pending adjudication

before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una, Himachal Pradesh.

1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
2

2. Quint-essential facts, as emerge from the pleadings as

well as other material adduced from the record by respective parties,

.

are that the FIR, sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings,

came to be lodged at the behest of respondent No. 2, Ms. Anjana

Bala (in short “complainant”), who alleged that her marriage was

solemnized with accused No. 1, Ravi Kumar on 03.01.2016, as per

of
Hindu rites and customs and thereafter, both cohabited together in

shared household at Village Badehra and out of their wedlock, no

child was born. Complainant alleged that her parents had spent
rt
approximately Rs.10,00,000/- on celebration of her marriage and they

also gave sufficient dowry articles and gifts as demanded by the

accused named in the FIR. Complainant alleged that since accused

had knowledge that she was working, accused No. 1 started checking

her mobile to ascertain details of her salary and savings. She alleged

that when accused started demanding money from her, she refused

to give by stating that she doesn’t have sufficient money with her as

she had already spent huge amount on solemnization of her

marriage. She alleged that on afore account, accused started

maltreating her and they repeatedly compelled her to bring all house

daily products and pay them Rs.15,000/- monthly. She alleged that

when she refused to comply with the aforesaid demands of the

accused, they started harassing her on one pretext or other by using

filthy and foul language. She alleged that in the month of September

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
3

2022, she requested her husband, i.e. accused No. 1 to give her

some amount for household expenses, to which he agreed, but she

.

was astonished, when she received notice from Court of the

Additional Principal Judge (II), Family Court, Una, Himachal Pradesh,

with regard to petition filed by her husband under Section 13-1 (ia) (ib)

of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, on false and manipulated facts. She

of
alleged that when she asked the accused about filing of false and

baseless divorce petition, they turned deaf ears and did not care, and

as such, she was compelled to disclose each and everything to her
rt
parents telephonically, who immediately reached her matrimonial

house to inquire reason for filing divorce petition. She alleged that

accused became hyper and started levelling baseless allegations on

her, without any rhyme and reasons and started demanding the

amount of Rs.2,00,000/- from her as well as her parents. She alleged

that accused also started threatening her that they would forcibly

dispossess her from shared household consisting of three rooms

kitchen, latrine, and bathroom at Village Badehra, Tehsil Haroli,

District Una and when she requested them not to commit such acts,

the accused threatened her with dire consequences and also abused

her. She alleged that accused have not only caused harassment,

mental agony, stress and humiliation, but have also caused mental

cruelty to her, and as such, she approached SHO, Police Station

Sadar, Una, but since no action was taken, she was compelled to file

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
4

complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Una, but since aforesaid

authority also failed to take any action, she was constrained to

.

institute complaint Section 156(3) Cr.P.C in the competent Court of

Law, which, after having examined complaint as well as report

submitted by the Police, ordered registration of FIR, which is being

sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings.

of

3. Though after completion of investigation, Police has

already presented challan in the competent Court of law, but before

same could be taken to its logical end, accused have approached this
rt
Court in the instant proceedings for quashing of FIR as well as

consequent proceedings pending in the competent Court of law on

the ground that FIR, sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings,

is a sheer abuse of process of law because no case much less under

Sections 498-A, 406, 404, 506 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code is

made out against the accused.

4. Mr. Divya Raj Singh, learned counsel for the accused,

vehemently argued that bare perusal of allegations in the FIR itself

suggests that false story has been concocted by the complainant to

harass the accused. He stated that FIR, sought to be quashed in the

instant proceedings, filed at the behest of the complaint, is nothing but

a counterblast to the divorce petition filed by accused No. 1. He

alleged that allegation of demanding dowry, if any, in the shape of

Rs.2,00,000/- came to be levelled against the accused after institution

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
5

of divorce petition by accused No. 1 in the competent Court of Law.

Mr. Thakur further submitted that though there is nothing to suggest

.

that accused ever compelled the complainant to spend money on

household things, but even if such allegation is presumed to be

correct, such act, if any, of the complainant cannot be construed to be

demand of dowry, which is punishable under Section 498A of Indian

of
Penal Code. He further submitted that ill-intention of the complainant

to harass the accused can be gathered from the ominous allegation of

harassment levelled against the each and every member of the
rt
family. He alleged that complainant has neither provided any specific

details nor described any particular instance of harassment, rather

she has failed to mention the time, date, place or manner in which the

alleged harassment occurred or the nature, particulars, or details of

the alleged demand. He further submitted that mere allegation that

the accused mentally harassed the complainant in respect to the

demand for dowry does not fulfill the essential ingredients of the

offence under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code, especially in the

absence of any cogent material or evidence on record to substantiate

the allegation. He further submitted there is no mention of specific

incident, on which date accused allegedly assaulted the complainant,

subjected her to mental cruelty, or committed any act constituting

cruelty as per Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code to the complainant,

rather FIR has been filed solely to wreak vengeance against accused

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
6

No. 1, who otherwise, being dissatisfied with conduct of the

complainant, chose to file divorce petition in the competent Court of

.

Law. Mr. Divya Raj Singh, learned counsel for the accused further

argued that since for the submissions made hereinabove, case of

prosecution initiated pursuant to lodging of FIR sought to be quashed

is bound to fail in all probabilities, no fruitful purpose would be served

of
in case prosecution against the accused is permitted to continue.

5. To the contrary, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional

Advocate General representing the respondent-State, and Mr.
rt
Abhishek Nagta, learned counsel for respondent No. 2, while refuting

the aforesaid contentions raised at the behest of learned counsel

representing the accused, vehemently argued that present petition is

not maintainable for the reason that FIR sought to be quashed has

culminated into charge sheet. They further argued that bare perusal of

allegations contained in FIR itself suggest that from day one of her

marriage, complainant was put to undue harassment and

maltreatment for her bringing less dowry. They further submitted that

complainant has specifically alleged that repeatedly she was asked

for some amount by her husband as well as other family members for

household needs, which can also be termed as dowry. They further

argued that complainant has specifically alleged that sum of

Rs.2,00,000/- was demanded by her in-laws after filing of divorce

petition, which act itself suggests demand of dowry. Learned counsel

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
7

representing respondents further argued that since complainant was

constantly harassed, tortured and put to mental agony for bringing

.

less dowry and illegal demands for money were being made, no

illegality can be said to have been committed by the Police by

registering case under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code against

the accused named in FIR. They submitted that otherwise also,

of
cruelty, if any, meted to the complainant can be proved by leading

cogent and convincing evidence, which can also be led in case trial is

permitted to continue and any order passed by this Court, thereby
rt
accepting the prayer made on behalf of the accused would preempt

the trial court from conducting trial, which otherwise is very essential

in the case at hand to ascertain the correctness in the allegation

levelled by the complainant in the FIR sought to be quashed.

6. I have heard learned counsel of the parties and gone

through the record carefully.

7. Before ascertaining the genuineness and correctness of

the submissions and counter-submissions having been made by the

learned counsel for the parties vis-à-vis prayer made in the instant

petition, this Court deems it necessary to discuss/elaborate upon the

scope and competence of this Court to quash the criminal

proceedings, while exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.PC (now

528 of BNSS).

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
8

8. A three-Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case

titled State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy and others, 1977 (2)

.

SCC 699, held that High Court while exercising power under Section

482 Cr.PC is entitled to quash the proceedings, if it comes to the

conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an

abuse of the process of the Court or that the ends of justice require

of
that the proceeding ought to be quashed.

9. Subsequently, in case titled State of Haryana and

others v. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, the
rt
Hon’ble Apex Court, while elaborately discussing the scope and

competence of High Court to quash criminal proceedings under

Section 482 Cr.PC laid down certain principles governing the

jurisdiction of High Court to exercise its power. After passing of

aforesaid judgment, issue with regard to exercise of power under

Section 482 Cr.PC, again came to be considered by the Hon’ble Apex

Court in case bearing Criminal Appeal No.577 of 2017 (arising out of

SLP (CrL.) No. 287 of 2017) titled Vineet Kumar and Ors. v. State of

U.P. and Anr., wherein it has been held that saving of the High

Court’s inherent powers, both in civil and criminal matters, is designed

to achieve a salutary public purpose i.e. court proceedings ought not

be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or

persecution.

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
9

10. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Prashant Bharti v. State

(NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293, relying upon its earlier judgment

.

titled as Rajiv Thapar and Ors v. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC

330, reiterated that High Court has inherent powers under Section

482 Cr.PC., to quash the proceedings against an accused, at the

stage of issuing process, or at the stage of committal, or even at the

of
stage of framing of charge, but such power must always be used with

caution, care and circumspection. In the aforesaid judgment, the

Hon’ble Apex Court concluded that while exercising its inherent
rt
jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.PC, Court exercising such

power must be fully satisfied that the material produced by the

accused is such, that would lead to the conclusion, that his/their

defence is based on sound, reasonable, and indubitable facts and the

material adduced on record itself overrule the veracity of the

allegations contained in the accusations levelled by the

prosecution/complainant. Besides above, the Hon’ble Apex Court

further held that material relied upon by the accused should be such,

as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the

actual basis of the accusations as false. In such a situation, the

judicial conscience of the High Court would persuade it to exercise its

power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash such criminal

proceedings, for that would prevent abuse of process of the court, and

secure the ends of justice. In the aforesaid judgment titled as

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
10

Prashant Bharti v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293, the

Hon’ble Apex Court has held as under:-

.

“22. The proposition of law, pertaining to quashing of criminal

proceedings, initiated against an accused by a High Court
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
(hereinafter referred to as “the Cr.P.C.”) has been dealt with by

this Court in Rajiv Thapar & Ors. vs. Madan Lal Kapoor
wherein this Court inter alia held as under: (2013) 3 SCC 330,

of
paras 29-30)

29. The issue being examined in the instant case is the
jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.,
rt
if it chooses to quash the initiation of the prosecution against
an accused, at the stage of issuing process, or at the stage of

committal, or even at the stage of framing of charges. These
are all stages before the commencement of the actual trial.
The same parameters would naturally be available for later

stages as well. The power vested in the High Court under
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., at the stages referred to

hereinabove, would have far reaching consequences,
inasmuch as, it would negate the prosecution’s/complainant’s

case without allowing the prosecution/complainant to lead
evidence. Such a determination must always be rendered with

caution, care and circumspection. To invoke its inherent
jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. the High Court
has to be fully satisfied, that the material produced by the
accused is such, that would lead to the conclusion, that
his/their defence is based on sound, reasonable, and
indubitable facts; the material produced is such, as would rule
out and displace the assertions contained in the charges
levelled against the accused; and the material produced is
such, as would clearly reject and overrule the veracity of the
allegations contained in the accusations levelled by the

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
11

prosecution/complainant. It should be sufficient to rule out,
reject and discard the accusations levelled by the
prosecution/complainant, without the necessity of recording

.

any evidence. For this the material relied upon by the defence

should not have been refuted, or alternatively, cannot be
justifiably refuted, being material of sterling and impeccable

quality. The material relied upon by the accused should be
such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and
condemn the actual basis of the accusations as false. In such

of
a situation, the judicial conscience of the High Court would
persuade it to exercise its power under Section 482 of the
Cr.P.C. to quash such criminal proceedings, for that would
rt
prevent abuse of process of the court, and secure the ends of
justice.

30. Based on the factors canvassed in the foregoing
paragraphs, we would delineate the following steps to
determine the veracity of a prayer for quashing, raised by an

accused by invoking the power vested in the High Court under
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.:-

30.1 Step one, whether the material relied upon by the
accused is sound, reasonable, and indubitable, i.e., the

material is of sterling and impeccable quality?

30.2 Step two, whether the material relied upon by the

accused, would rule out the assertions contained in the
charges levelled against the accused, i.e., the material
is sufficient to reject and overrule the factual assertions
contained in the complaint, i.e., the material is such, as
would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and
condemn the factual basis of the accusations as false.
30.3 Step three, whether the material relied upon by the
accused, has not been refuted by the
prosecution/complainant; and/or the material is such,
that it cannot be justifiably refuted by the
prosecution/complainant?

30.4 Step four, whether proceeding with the trial would
result in an abuse of process of the court, and would not
serve the ends of justice?

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
12

30.5 If the answer to all the steps is in the affirmative,
judicial conscience of the High Court should persuade it
to quash such criminal – proceedings, in exercise of
power vested in it under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
Such exercise of power, besides doing justice to the

.

accused, would save precious court time, which would

otherwise be wasted in holding such a trial (as well as,
proceedings arising therefrom) specially when, it is clear
that the same would not conclude in the conviction of

the accused.”

11. It is quite apparent from the bare perusal of aforesaid

of
judgments passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court from time to time that

where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide
rt
and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior

motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to

spite him/her due to private and personal grudge, High Court while

exercising power under Section 482 Cr.PC can proceed to quash the

proceedings.

12. The Hon’ble Apex Court in case tilted Anand Kumar

Mohatta and Anr. v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi)

Department of Home and Anr, AIR 2019 SC 210, has held that abuse

of process caused by FIR stands aggravated if the FIR has taken the

form of a charge sheet after investigation and as such, the abuse of

law or miscarriage of justice can be rectified by the court while

exercising power under Section 482 Cr.PC. The relevant paras of the

judgment are as under:

16. Even otherwise it must be remembered that the provision
invoked by the accused before the High Court is Section 482
Cr. P.C and that this Court is hearing an appeal from an order

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
13

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Section 482 of Cr.P.C reads as
follows:-

“482. Saving of inherent power of the High Court.-
Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect

.

the inherent powers of the High Court to make such

orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order
under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of
any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.”

17. There is nothing in the words of this Section which restricts
the exercise of the power of the Court to prevent the abuse of
process of court or miscarriage of justice only to the stage of

of
the FIR. It is settled principle of law that the High court can
exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C even when
the discharge application is pending with the trial court ( G.
rt
Sagar Suri and Anr. V. State of U.P. and Others, (2000) 2 SCC
636 (para 7), Umesh Kumar v. State of Andhra Pradesh and

Anr. (2013) 10 SCC 591 (para 20). Indeed, it would be a
travesty to hold that proceedings initiated against a person can
be interfered with at the stage of FIR but not if it has advanced,

and the allegations have materialized into a charge sheet. On
the contrary it could be said that the abuse of process caused

by FIR stands aggravated if the FIR has taken the form of a
charge sheet after investigation. The power is undoubtedly

conferred to prevent abuse of process of power of any court.”

13. The Hon’ble Apex Court in case titled Pramod

Suryabhan Pawar v. The State of Maharashtra and Anr, (2019) 9

SCC 608, has elaborated the scope of exercise of power under

Section 482 Cr.PC, the relevant para whereof reads as under:-

“7. Section 482 is an overriding section which saves the inherent
powers of the court to advance the cause of justice. Under
Section 482 the inherent jurisdiction of the court can be
exercised (i) to give effect to an order under the CrPC; (ii) to
prevent the abuse of the process of the court; and (iii) to

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
14

otherwise secure the ends of justice. The powers of the court
under Section 482 are wide and the court is vested with a
significant amount of discretion to decide whether or not to

.

exercise them. The court should be guarded in the use of its

extraordinary jurisdiction to quash an FIR or criminal proceeding
as it denies the prosecution the opportunity to establish its case

through investigation and evidence. These principles have been
consistently followed and re-iterated by this Court. In Inder
Mohan Goswami v State of Uttaranchal, this Court observed.

of
“23. This Court in a number of cases has laid down the scope
and ambit of courts’ powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Every
High Court has inherent powers to act ex debito justitiae to do
rt
real and substantial justice, for the administration of which
alone it exists, or to prevent abuse of the process of the court.

Inherent power under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised:

(i) to give effect to an order under the Code;

(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of the court, and

(iii) to otherwise secure the ends of justice.

24. Inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C though wide
have to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with great caution

and only when exercise is justified by the tests specifically laid

down in this section itself. Authority of the court exists for the
advancement of justice. If any abuse of the process leading to

injustice is brought to the notice of the court, then the court
would be justified in preventing injustice by invoking inherent
powers in absence of specific provisions in the statute.”

8. Given the varied nature of cases that come before the High
Courts, any strict test as to when the court’s extraordinary
powers can be exercised is likely to tie the court’s hands in the
face of future injustices. This Court in State of Haryana v Bhajan
Lal conducted a detailed study of the situations where the court
may exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction and laid down a list of
illustrative examples of where quashing may be appropriate. It is

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
15

not necessary to discuss all the examples, but a few bear
relevance to the present case. The court in Bhajan Lal noted
that quashing may be appropriate where, (2007) 12 SCC 1 1992

.

Supp (1) SCC 335

“102. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information
report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face

value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie
constitute any offence or make out a case against the
accused.

of
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and
other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose
a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police
rt
officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an

order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2).
……….

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with
mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted

with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused
and with a view to spite him due to private and personal

grudge.”

In deciding whether to exercise its jurisdiction under Section
482, the Court does not adjudicate upon the veracity of the

facts alleged or enter into an appreciation of competing
evidence presented. The limited question is whether on the
face of the FIR, the allegations constitute a cognizable offence.
As this Court noted in Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v State of
Maharashtra, 2018 SCC OnLine SC3100 (“Dhruvaram
Sonar”):

“13. It is clear that for quashing proceedings, meticulous
analysis of factum of taking cognizance of an offence by
the Magistrate is not called for. Appreciation of evidence
is also not permissible in exercise of inherent powers. If
the allegations set out in the complaint do not constitute
the offence of which cognizance has been taken, it is

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
16

open to the High Court to quash the same in exercise of
its inherent powers.”

14. Aforesaid law, clearly stipulates that court can exercise

.

power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash

criminal proceedings, in cases, where the allegations made in the first

information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face

value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any

of
offence or make out a case against the accused.

15. Now being guided by the aforesaid proposition of law laid
rt
down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, this Court would make an endeavor

to examine and consider the prayer made in the instant petition vis-à-

vis factual matrix of the case.

16. Since facts, which may be relevant for adjudication of

case at hand, as emerged from the FIR sought to be quashed have

been already taken note of in the earlier part of the judgment, this

Court sees no necessity to take note of the same again for the sake of

brevity. It is not in dispute that marriage inter se accused No. 1, Ravi

Kumar and the complainant was solemnized on 03.11.2016 and

thereafter, FIR, which is subject matter of the present case, came to

be lodged by the complainant in year 2023 i.e. after 7 years of

marriage. There is nothing in the FIR, suggestive of the fact that prior

to lodging of FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings,

complaint of any kind ever came to be made to the police or Gram

Panchayat at the behest of the complainant, alleging therein her

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
17

torture, harassment at the hands of accused for her bringing less

dowry. Moreover, this Court, after having carefully perused each and

.

every allegation contained in FIR sought to be quashed, finds that

direct allegation of demanding dowry in the shape of money of

Rs.2,00,000/- came to be made by the accused in the year 2023 that

too after filing of divorce petition by her husband. As per own case of

of
the complainant, the alleged demand of Rs. 2,00,000/-, was made by

the accused in the year 2023, when the complainant was confronted

with the fact that the accused No.1 had filed a divorce petition before
rt
the Court of the learned Additional Principal Judge (II), Family Court,

Una, Himachal Pradesh. Allegedly when parents of the complainant

attempted to pacify the accused or made an attempt to ascertain the

reason for filing divorce petition, allegedly accused named in the FIR

demanded sum of Rs.2,00,000/-. Since there is nothing in the FIR to

demonstrate that prior to year 2023, demand, if any, of such huge

amount was ever made, coupled with the fact that no complaint in that

regard was ever lodged with the police or Gram Panchayat of the

village concerned, this Court finds sufficient force in the argument

raised by Mr. Divya Raj Singh, learned counsel for the accused, that

FIR sought to be quashed is nothing but counterblast to the divorce

petition filed at the behest of accused No.1.

17. Though, at this stage, Mr. Abhishek Nagta, learned

counsel for the complainant, invited the attention of this Court to the

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
18

FIR to demonstrate that, even prior to the alleged demand of

₹2,00,000/- made in the year 2023, the accused had been making

.

similar demands, but this Court is not persuaded to accept the

aforesaid submission for the reason that there is nothing in the FIR to

suggest that the accused had ever demanded money by way of

dowry, rather, as per the own case of the complainant, after

of
discovering that she was earning a monthly salary, the accused

repeatedly compelled her to incur expenses towards household

articles. Such allegation, even if assumed to be true, cannot, by itself,
rt
be construed as a demand for dowry. Admittedly, prior to lodging FIR

sought to be quashed, complainant remained in the company of the

accused for more than 6 and a half years and during this period,

neither she complained to the police, nor to her parents with regard to

her harassment on account of bringing less dowry or illegal demand

of dowry, if any, made by the accused.

18. Leaving everything aside, this Court finds that allegations

made by the complainant are vague. She, besides implicating her

husband, has also attempted to implicate the entire family, against

whom otherwise allegations of demanding dowry or money are totally

missing. While alleging demand of dowry, complainant has neither

furnished any specific particulars nor described any particular

instance of harassment. She failed to mention the time, date, place, or

manner in which the alleged acts of harassment were committed.

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
19

Otherwise also, she has not disclosed the nature of the alleged

demand, its particulars, or the circumstances in which such demand

.

was allegedly made. At this stage, this Court finds it necessary to take

note of Section 498A, which reads as under:

“498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman

subjecting her to cruelty.–

of
Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of
a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished
with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years
and shall also be liable to fine.Explanation.– For the purpose
rt
of this section, “cruelty” means–(a)any wilful conduct which is

of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit
suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health
(whether mental or physical) of the woman; or(b)harassment
of the woman where such harassment is with a view to

coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful
demand for any property or valuable security or is on account

of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such
demand.”

19. As per aforesaid provision of law, whoever, being the

husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such

woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term

which may extend to three years. However, for the purpose of this

section, “cruelty’ would mean any willful conduct which is of such

nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause

grave injury or to danger to life, limb or health of the woman or

harassment of woman where such harassment is with a view to

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
20

coerce her or any person related to her, to meet any unlawful demand

for any property or valuable security. Merely stating that accused

.

mentally harassed the complainant with respect to demand of dowry

does not fulfill the ingredients of Section 498A Indian Penal Code,

especially in the absence of any cogent material evidence on record

to substantiate the said allegation. The term “cruelty” cannot be

of
established without specific instances. Reliance in this regard is

placed upon judgment passed by the Honorable Apex Court in case

titled Shobhit Kumar Mittal v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another,
rt
2025 LiveLaw (SC) 945. Relevant paras of the afore judgment are

extracted hereinbelow: –

“16. Further, Section 3 of the Dowry Act deals with the penalty

for giving or taking dowry. It states that any person who gives,
takes, or abets the giving or taking of dowry shall face a
punishment of imprisonment for a minimum term of five years

and a fine not less than fifteen thousand rupees or the value

of the dowry, whichever is greater. Section 4 of the Dowry Act
talks about the penalty for demanding dowry. It states that any
person demanding dowry directly or indirectly from the parents

or other relatives or guardians of a bride or bridegroom, as the
case may be, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term
which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend
to two years and with fine which may extend to ten thousand
rupees.

17. The issue for consideration is whether, given the facts and
circumstances of the present case and after examining the
FIR, the High Court was right in refusing to quash the criminal
proceedings arising out of FIR No.347 of 2023 dated

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
21

09.11.2023 under Section 323 and 498A of the IPC and
Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Act, as against the appellant
herein.

.

18. A bare perusal of the FIR shows that the allegations made
by complainant/respondent No.2 are vague and omnibus.
Other than claiming that the husband and his family along with

the accused/appellant herein mentally harassed her with a
demand for dowry, the complainant/respondent No.2 has not

of
provided any specific details or described any particular
instance of harassment. She has also not mentioned the time,
date, place, or manner in which the alleged harassment
occurred or the details of the nature of demand or its
rt
particulars. Therefore, the FIR lacks concrete and precise

allegations. Furthermore, the complainant/respondent No.2
has failed to impress the Court as to how the alleged
harassment has any proximate relationship to the said injury
and nerve damage that she sustained, so as to punish her in-

laws under Section 323 IPC. There is no remote or proximate
act or omission attributed to the accused/appellant that

implicates him or assigns him any specific role in the said FIR
for the offence of hurt as defined under Section 319 IPC.

Furthermore, merely stating that the accused/appellant has
mentally harassed the complainant/respondent No.2 with

respect to a demand for dowry does not fulfill the ingredients
of Section 498A of IPC specially in absence of any cogent
material or evidence on record to substantiate the said
allegations. The term “cruelty” cannot be established without
specific instances. The tendency of invoking the aforesaid
provisions, without mentioning any specific detail, weakens
the case of the prosecution and casts serious aspersions on
the probability of the version of the complainant. Therefore,
this Court cannot ignore the missing specifics in the FIR which
is the basic premise for invoking the criminal machinery of the

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
22

State. In such cases involving allegations of cruelty and
harassment, there would normally be a series of offending
acts, which would be required to be spelt out by the

.

complainant against perpetrators in specific terms to initiate

criminal proceedings against them. Therefore, mere general
allegations of harassment without pointing out the specific

details would not be sufficient to continue criminal
proceedings against any person.

19. Courts have to be careful and cautious in dealing with

of
complaints and must take pragmatic realities into
consideration while dealing with matrimonial disputes where
the allegations have to be scrutinized with great care and
rt
circumspection in order to prevent miscarriage of justice and
abuse of process of law.

20. In this regard, it would be apposite to rely on the judgment
of this Court in the case of State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal,

1992 Suppl (1) SCC 335 (“Bhajan Lal”) with particular
reference to paragraph 102 therein, wherein this Court

observed as hereunder:

“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various
relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and

of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a
series of decisions relating to the exercise of the
extraordinary power Under Article 226 or the inherent
powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have
extracted and reproduced above, we give the following
categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such
power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the
process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of
justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any
precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised
and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
23

an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein
such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information

.

report or the complaint, even if they are taken at
their face value and accepted in their entirety do not
prima facie constitute any offence or make out a

case against the Accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report

of
and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do
not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an
investigation by police officers Under Section 156(1) of
rt
the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within
the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the
FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support

of the same do not disclose the commission of any
offence and make out a case against the Accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute
a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-

cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a
police officer without an order of a Magistrate as

contemplated Under Section 155(2) of the Code.

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint
are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis
of which no prudent person can ever reach a just
conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding
against the Accused.

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in
any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act
(under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
24

institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or
where there is a specific provision in the Code or the
concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the

.

grievance of the aggrieved party.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended
with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is

maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the Accused and with a view to

of
spite him due to private and personal grudge.”

21. On a careful consideration of the aforementioned
judicial tests, we find that none of the offences alleged
rt
against the accused/ appellant herein is made out. In
fact, we find that the allegations of cruelty, mental

harassment and voluntarily causing hurt against the
accused/appellant herein are vague and general in
nature and therefore, the judgment of this Court in the

case of Bhajan Lal squarely applies to the facts of this
case. It is neither expedient nor in the interest of justice
to permit the present prosecution emanating from the

FIR to continue.”

20. In afore judgment, Honorable Apex Court has

categorically held that mere general allegations of harassment without

pointing out the specific details would not be sufficient to continue

criminal proceedings against any person, rather, courts need to be

more careful and cautious in dealing with complaints and must take

pragmatic realities into perspective, while dealing with matrimonial

disputes.

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
25

21. Reliance is also placed upon judgment passed by the

Honorable Apex Court in case titled as Sanjay D. Jain & Ors v. State

.

of Maharashtra & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw SC 960, wherein Hon’ble

Apex Court, while placing reliance on its earlier judgment in

Digambar and Another V. The State of Maharashtra and Another,

2024 INSC 1019, held that if the allegations made in the FIR or the

of
complaint, even when taken at their face value and accepted in their

entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out any

case against the accused, quashing of the proceedings would be
rt
justified. In afore case, Hon’ble Apex Court held that as regards the

ingredients for making out an offence punishable under Section 498-A

of the India Penal Code is concerned, the requirement is that there

has to be cruelty inflicted against the victim which either drives her to

commit suicide or cause grave injury to herself or lead to such

conduct that would cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health.

Relevant paras of the afore judgment are extracted hereinbelow: –

“9. Before examining the FIR along with the complaint of the
complainant, we may refer to the parameters that are to be
borne in mind while entertaining the prayer for quashing of the
FIR. If the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint, even
when taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety
do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out any
case against the accused, quashing of the proceedings would
be justified. Vague and general allegations cannot lead to
forming of a prima facie case. As regards the ingredients for
making out an offence punishable under Section 498-A of the
Penal Code is concerned, the requirement is that there has to

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
26

be cruelty inflicted against the victim which either drives her to
commit suicide or cause grave injury to herself or lead to such
conduct that would cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or

.

health. The latter part of the provision refers to harassment

with a view to satisfy an unlawful demand for any property or
valuable security raised by the husband or his relatives. These

aspects have been considered in detail in a recent decision in
Digambar (supra) (to which one of us, B.R. Gavai, J, as he
then was, was a party).

of

10. A perusal of the FIR and its consideration in entirety
indicates that statements of a general nature have been made
therein as against the present appellants. The complainant
rt
states that on 07.08.2021 when she had gone to her parental

house, she had received a call from her mother-in-law raising
a demand for clothes and jewellery. When she returned to her
matrimonial house on 30.08.2021, she had taken few clothes

for the family members. Except this statement, all other
statements are of a general nature as well as vague without
any particulars. There are other omnibus statements made in

the complaint without any particulars whatsoever. It is also to
be noted that for the purpose of constituting an offence

punishable under Section 498-A of the Penal Code, cruelty as
indicated in the Explanation to the said provision must be

stated to be inflicted. The cruelty caused by the husband and
his family members should be of such nature that it is inflicted
with the intention to cause grave injury or drive the victim to
commit suicide or inflict grave injury to herself. Such
allegations are absent in the present case. We do not find that
on a complete reading of the complaint, a prima facie case for
proceeding under Section 498- A of the Penal Code has been
made out against the appellants.

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
27

11. As regards the offence punishable under Sections 377 and
506 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code is concerned, it is
seen that the allegations in this regard have been made only

.

against the complainant’s husband and not against the

present appellants. The entire tenor of the complaint in that
regard seeks to implicate the complainant’s husband and all

incidents stated therein relate to him. There is no allegation
whatsoever in that context against the appellants that would
require them to face trial on that count. The proceedings

of
insofar as the present appellants are concerned, thus, deserve
to be quashed in their entirety. In our view, the High Court
failed to notice this aspect of the matter while declining to
rt
quash the proceedings against the appellants.

12. For the aforesaid reasons, we are satisfied that on the
touchstone of the law laid down in State of Haryana and
Others vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1990 INSC 363, a case has

been made out by the appellants for quashing of the criminal
proceedings lodged against them under Sections 498-A, 377
and 506 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code. Continuation

of these proceedings would amount to an abuse of the
process of law and, hence, the appellants are entitled to relief.

22. Reliance is also placed upon judgment passed by

Hon’ble Apex Court in Achin Gupta v. State of Haryana & Anr.,

2024 LiveLaw (SC) 343. In afore case, Hon’ble Apex Court, while

specifically dealing with case registered under Section 498-A of Indian

Penal Code, observed that if a person is made to face a criminal trial

on some general and sweeping allegations without bringing on record

any specific instances of criminal conduct, it is nothing but abuse of

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
28

the process of the court. Relevant paras of the afore judgment are

extracted hereinbelow: –

.

“25. If a person is made to face a criminal trial on some

general and sweeping allegations without bringing on record
any specific instances of criminal conduct, it is nothing but
abuse of the process of the court. The court owes a duty to

subject the allegations levelled in the complaint to a thorough
scrutiny to find out, prima facie, whether there is any grain of

of
truth in the allegations or whether they are made only with the
sole object of involving certain individuals in a criminal charge,
more particularly when a prosecution arises from a
rt
matrimonial dispute.

26. In Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, reported in 2010
Criminal Law Journal 4303 (1), this Court observed the
following: –

“28. It is a matter of common knowledge that
unfortunately matrimonial litigation is rapidly increasing
in our country. All the courts in our country including

this court are flooded with matrimonial cases. This

clearly demonstrates discontent and unrest in the
family life of a large number of people of the society.

29. The courts are receiving a large number of cases
emanating from section 498-A of the Penal Code, 1860
which reads as under:

“498-A. Husband or relative of husband of a
woman subjecting her to cruelty.-Whoever,
being the husband or the relative of the husband
of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty
shall be punished with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to three years and shall also
be liable to fine.

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
29

Explanation.- For the purposes of this section,
‘cruelty’ means:

(a) any wilful conduct which is of such a

.

natureas is likely to drive the woman to commit
suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life,
limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the

woman; or

(b) harassment of the woman where

of
suchharassment is with a view to coercing her or
any person related to her to meet any unlawful
rt demand for any property or valuable security or
is on account of failure by her or any person
related to her to meet such demand.”

30. It is a matter of common experience that most of these
complaints under section 498-A IPC are filed in the heat of the

moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations. We
come across a large number of such complaints which are not
even bona fide and are filed with oblique motive. At the same

time, rapid increase in the number of genuine cases of dowry
harassment are also a matter of serious concern.

31. The learned members of the Bar have enormoussocial

responsibility and obligation to ensure that the social fiber of
family life is not ruined or demolished. They must ensure that
exaggerated versions of small incidents should not be
reflected in the criminal complaints. Majority of the complaints
are filed either on their advice or with their concurrence. The
learned members of the Bar who belong to a noble profession
must maintain its noble traditions and should treat every
complaint under section 498-A as a basic human problem and
must make serious endeavour to help the parties in arriving at
an amicable resolution of that human problem. They must

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
30

discharge their duties to the best of their abilities to ensure
that social fiber, peace and tranquility of the society remains
intact. The members of the Bar should also ensure that one

.

complaint should not lead to multiple cases.

32. Unfortunately, at the time of filing of the complaint the
implications and consequences are not properly visualized by

the complainant that such complaint can lead to
insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the

of
complainant, accused and his close relations.

23. Most importantly, in afore case Hon’ble Apex Court held

that
rt
category (7) referred to in Bhajan Lal‘ supra should be taken

into consideration, while applying in cases like on the one hand, a bit

liberally. It was observed that where the Court is satisfied that the

implication of the husband and his close relatives is actuated by an

oblique motive, then, notwithstanding the fact that the FIR and the

charge-sheet disclose the commission of a cognizable offence, the

Court, in order to do substantial justice, should read between the

lines, discern the complainant’s oblique motive, and adopt a

pragmatic approach while considering the matter.

24. Reliance is also placed upon another judgment passed

by the Hon’ble Apex Court in P.V. Krishnabhat & Anr. v. State of

Karnataka & Ors., 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 149. In the aforesaid case,

the Hon’ble Apex Court, after having found that the allegations

against the father-in-law or mother-in-law lacked specificity, and there

were no concrete details of dowry demands or acts of cruelty

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
31

attributed to them, proceeded to quash the FIR. Most importantly, in

the aforesaid judgment, the Hon’ble Apex Court held that criminal law

.

should not be used as a tool for harassment or vendetta, rather,

allegations in a criminal complaint must be scrutinized with care to

ensure that they disclose a prima facie case before subjecting

individuals to the rigors of a criminal trial. Relevant paras of the afore

of
judgment are extracted hereinbelow:-

“13. After a thorough consideration of the submissions and the
materials placed on record, we find that the allegations
rt
against the father-in-law and mother-inlaw are indeed general
and lacked specificity. The complainant has not provided any

concrete details of dowry demands or acts of cruelty
attributable to them. The admitted fact of their separate
residence further weakens the complainant’s case against

them. In the absence of prima facie evidence to establish their
involvement in the alleged offenses, the proceedings against
the father-in-law and mother-in-law cannot be sustained.

14. Regarding the husband, it is evident that the allegations

against him are similarly vague and unsubstantiated. The
complainant has made generalized accusations without

furnishing specific instances of misconduct. No specific
allegations and neither any material have come on record to
show a prima facie commission of the alleged offences of
cruelty and dowry demand. The couple had a love marriage
and experienced a blissful relationship during the initial years
of their marriage, as is admitted on record. This, coupled with
the lack of material evidence to support the allegations, leads
to the conclusion that no prima facie case of cruelty or dowry
demand is made out against the husband as well. Criminal
proceedings cannot be permitted to continue in the absence of

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
32

sufficient evidence to prima facie establish the commission of
an offense.

15. Further, as is evident from the record, the marriage

.

between the parties has been dissolved, with categorical
findings regarding cruelty meted out by the complainant
against the appellant-husband. The allegations made in the

criminal complaint, regarding dowry demand, cruelty, and
harassment have all been held to be baseless, false and

of
frivolous. Though, these are separate proceedings, but
findings regarding the truth and veracity of such serious
allegations, as have been made by the complainant herein,
become relevant in order to do justice and avoid misuse of
rt
criminal justice system. The Family Court has made

categorical findings to hold that the allegations are false and
nothing has been produced to or prove any merit in the
allegations. Even in the criminal proceedings impugned before

us, nothing has come on record to show commission of these
alleged acts, even on a prima facie analysis. Once it has been
held that there is no merit or truthfulness to the allegations

made, then criminal proceedings on the very same allegations
cannot be allowed to continue and propagate misuse of the

criminal justice system.

16. Criminal law should not be used as a tool for harassment
or vendetta. The allegations in a criminal complaint must be
scrutinized with care to ensure that they disclose a prima facie
case before subjecting individuals to the rigors of a criminal
trial. The cases involving allegations under Section 498-A of
the IPC and the DP Act often require a careful and cautious
approach to prevent misuse of the law. While the provisions
are intended to protect women from cruelty and dowry
harassment, they should not be used to settle personal scores
or pursue ulterior motives.”

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
33

25. Having carefully perused allegations levelled in the FIR

sought to be quashed vis-à-vis the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex

.

Court in the judgments discussed hereinabove, this Court is

persuaded to agree with Mr. Divya Raj Singh, learned counsel

representing the accused, that the FIR lodged at the behest of the

complainant, if permitted to sustain, would amount to a sheer abuse

of
of the process of law. The complainant, after having lived for more

than six and a half years, with the husband and his family, chose to

lodge an FIR that too, after the initiation of divorce proceedings at the
rt
instance of her husband (accused No. 1). Prior to lodging the FIR, the

complainant had neither filed any complaint alleging that she had

been subjected to domestic violence by the accused nor lodged any

complaint with the police or informed her parents regarding any

alleged unlawful demand of dowry made by the accused named in the

FIR. Moreover, the specific allegation of a demand of dowry in the

shape of Rs,2,00,000/- allegedly made by the accused in the year

2023 came to levelled after receipt of the notice in the divorce petition,

which act of the complainant certainly compels this Court to agree

with the submission made at the behest of the accused that the FIR

sought to be quashed is nothing but a counter-blast to the divorce

petition. There are no specific details or particular instances of

harassment, if any, meted out to the complainant at the hands of the

accused named in the FIR, rather, the allegations made by the

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS
34

complainant are vague and omnibus, which can be construed to be

manifestly attended with mala fides and leveled to wreak vengeance.

.

26. Having scanned the entire material adduced on record,

vis-à-vis prayer made in the instant petition, this Court is persuaded to

agree with learned Counsel for the accused that this Court, while

exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., may proceed to quash

of
the FIR/challan submitted against the accused, because continuance

thereof would be sheer abuse of process of law, since, for the

reasons stated herein above, case of prosecution is bound to fail
rt
against the accused in all probabilities. Otherwise also, in case prayer

made on behalf of the accused is not accepted, they would be

subjected to unnecessary ordeal of facing protracted trial, which

otherwise is bound to fail.

27. Consequently, in view of detailed discussion made herein

above and law taken into consideration, present petition is allowed.

FIR No.178 of 2023 dated 28.06.2023, registered under Sections 498-

A, 406, 404, 506 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code at Police Station

Haroli, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, as well as consequent

proceedings, are quashed and set aside. The petitioners are

discharged henceforth. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed

of.

(Sandeep Sharma),
Judge
July 23, 2026
(sunil)

::: Downloaded on – 28/07/2026 20:30:01 :::CIS