The Bombay High Court’s Nagpur Bench recently rejected to suppress a First Information Report (FIR) filed against a man’s family in a Section 498A case, stating that relatives residing in faraway regions frequently intervene in a couple’s affairs and harass the wife.
A division bench consisting of Justices Sunil Shukre and Govind Sanap was hearing a petition filed by a husband, his parents, and siblings seeking to have a FIR filed against them dismissed. While the spouse lived in Akola district, his parents and a married sister were in Amravati district, and his younger brother was from Pune City, according to the accused.
They claimed that because they did not reside with the applicant-husband, the claims levelled against them as in-laws or relatives of the husband could not be considered real.
“Then, up until now, we’ve discovered that the claims levelled by the complainant wife against all of the applicants are particular in nature, and that determining their authenticity would only be possible at trial, not at this stage. Therefore, just because the remaining applicants do not live with the husband and wife does not mean that the complaints levelled against the in-laws are without merit,” the bench stated.
The couple got married in 2007 and have three children, however, the wife discovered in 2017 that her husband was having an extramarital affair. When she confronted him, he assaulted her, according to the wife, who claimed in her FIR that when she informed her husband’s parents and siblings about his extramarital affair, they began abusing her instead of restraining his behaviour. In addition, the in-laws demanded a dowry payment of Rs.50,000.
The court determined that there had been no broad or general omnibus remarks made against the in-laws, establishing a prima facie case against them. As a result, the Court refused to dismiss the FIR.
Case Title: Rajesh Himmat Pundkar vs State of Maharashtra