Ajay Kumar Reddy
(Querist) 14 July 2011
This query is : Resolved
In my case 498A is on malicious ground because I appled IPC 406 & 34 on her and her parents becuse she is not ready to give me my valuavle article. Then i applied for private complaint under sec 200crp. When she and her parents got Jamanti warrant on IPC 406 then she applied for the 498A case on me and my parents. So I need urgently required citation in which 498A case is done on malicious ground. Please treat as urgent because it is in last stage i.e. final argument
Help me Expert because all the evidence has finished last argument on 20th July of 2011. so i need citation for this ground.
2010 (3) KLT SN 96 (C.No.101) SC Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dalveer Bhandari & Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand Crl. A. No.1512 of 2010 13.8.2010
Penal Code 1860, S.498A - Tendency of implicating husband and all his immediate relations is also not uncommon - Courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration - Serious relook of entire provision is warranted by legislation.
Dalveer Bhandari, J.
Held: It is a matter of common experience that most of these complaints under S.498-A. I.P.C. 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. 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 complainant, accused and his close relations. The ultimate object of justice is to find out the truth and punish the guilty and protect the innocent. To find out the truth is a herculean task in majority of these complaints. The tendency of implicating husband and all his immediate relations is also not uncommon. At times, even after the conclusion of criminal trial, it is difficult to ascertain the real truth. The courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases. The allegations of harassment of husband's close relations who had been living in different cities and never visited or rarely visited the place where the complainant resided would have an entirely different complexion. The allegations of the complaint are required to be scrutinized with great care and circumspection. Experience reveals that long and protracted criminal trials lead to rancour, acrimony and bitterness in the relationship amongst the parties. It is also a matter of common knowledge that in cases filed by the complainant if the husband or the husband's relations had to remain in jail even for a few days, it would ruin the chances of amicable settlement altogether. The process of suffering is extremely long and painful. A serious relook of the entire provision is warranted by the legislation. It is also a matter of common knowledge that exaggerated versions of the incident are reflected in a large number of complaints. The tendency of over implication is also reflected in a very large number of cases. Criminal trials lead to immense sufferings for all concerned. Even ultimate acquittal in the trial may also not be able to wipe out the deep scars of suffering of ignominy. Unfortunately a large number of these complaints have not only flooded the courts but also have led to enormous social unrest affecting peace, harmony and happiness of the society. It is high time that the legislature must take into consideration the pragmatic realities and make suitable changes in the existing law. It is imperative for the legislature to take into consideration the informed public opinion and the pragmatic