HomeBusinessThe Bombay High Court quashed the section 498A case filed by a...

The Bombay High Court quashed the section 498A case filed by a judge against her husband. Judge said – husband entered hall and threatened her: Bombay High Court quashed FIR; Said – This is a mutual matter between husband and wife, not obstruction of public service. IG News

News

  • Hindu News
  • National
  • The Bombay High Court quashed the section 498A case filed by a judge against her husband

Mumbai12 minutes ago

  • copy the link

The Bombay High Court ordered quashing of the FIR against the judge. In this case, the court said that it was a mutual affair between husband and wife, and no one prevented the judge from performing her duty. The court also dismissed the case of violence filed under Section 498A IPC.

In fact, the judge registered a case of cruelty against her husband and mother-in-law under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

A bench of Justices AS Chandurkar and Jitendra Jain said that it appears that the FIR was filed only for revenge in the midst of a dispute between husband and wife.

The court also said that this is a case where the court should use its powers to prevent abuse of court processes to secure the end of justice.

They met through a matrimonial site
A woman who works as a judicial officer in Maharashtra met her husband through a matrimonial site. The two got married in February 2018.

The wife’s complaint states that after the wedding, the husband refused to marry her and there were several marital disputes between them.

She further states that on June 7, 2023, her husband and his brother entered her courtroom and threatened her to sign the divorce petition by mutual consent.

The same act was allegedly committed by her in-laws later that day.

The complaint claimed that this effectively prevented him from performing his judicial duties that day.

Based on the June 7 incident, the wife filed a police complaint on July 9, 2023 against the husband and in-laws and an FIR under sections 186, 353 (criminal force for discouraging a public servant), 498 A (cruelty). recorded. ) and Section 506 IPC (criminal intimidation). The period of offense in the FIR was from October 1, 2018 to June 7, 2023.

Aggrieved by the FIR, the husband and father-in-law moved the High Court seeking its quashing.

The court found no evidence that the husband and mother-in-law did not allow the wife to sit in on the morning session to perform her judicial duties.

The court announced that even during the afternoon hearing, the relatives did not enter the courtroom, but waited in the senate, and the judicial police arbitrarily left the court and entered the courtroom.

“It does not follow that there would be an obstruction of the wife in the performance of her public function, but on the contrary, she was performing her official duty on that day, therefore the provisions do not apply. The act of retiring to the chamber when told by his parent is a voluntary act of the informer,” the court said.

The court also did not find that the husband used any force to prevent the wife from performing her duty as a court officer or to create fear in her mind.

The High Court further observed that the differences and disagreements between the appellant and the mother-in-law, including the husband, would not constitute an offense under Section 498A IPC.

With these observations, the court quashed the FIR against the husband and mother-in-law.

RELATED ARTICLES
- Advertisment -

Most Popular