The Bombay High Court dismissed an application seeking quashing of FIR and criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., citing continued non-compliance with a judicial custody order and prima facie evidence of cruelty under Section 498-A IPC, along with supporting witness statements.

1. Introduction and Relief Sought

   • Para 1: The applicants challenged FIR (Crime No. 769/2022), charge sheet, and proceedings under Sections 323, 498-A, 504, and 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC.

2. Parties to the Case

   • Para 2-3: Applicants include the informant’s in-laws and sister-in-law. Allegations include dowry demands and harassment. The husband (Ravi) was not a party to this application.

3. Allegations by the Informant

   • Para 3-4: FIR and supplementary statement detail demands of Rs.10,00,000 for a car, physical abuse, and forced separation from her daughter.

4. Judicial Custody Proceedings

   • Para 4: Respondent sought custody of her daughter through Section 97 Cr.P.C. and later under the Guardians and Wards Act. A custody order dated 28.08.2023 remained uncomplied.

5. Conduct of Applicants

   • Para 5: The Court highlighted the applicants’ failure to disclose Ravi’s whereabouts, suggesting deliberate evasion to retain custody of the child.

6. Arguments by the Applicants

   • Para 6: Applicants argued vagueness in allegations and lack of material evidence in investigation to support the charges.

7. Counterarguments by the Respondent

   • Para 7: Respondent argued that allegations and witness statements were specific and corroborated, and applicants’ conduct disqualified them from discretionary relief under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

8. Observations by the Court

   • Para 8-11: The Court found prima facie evidence of cruelty, dowry demands, and mental harassment through continued separation of the child from the mother. Witness statements corroborated the informant’s claims.

9. Mental Harassment as Continuing Wrong

   • Para 12-13: Court recognized the mental agony caused by defying custody orders and labeled it as cruelty under Section 498-A IPC.

10. Discretionary Power of the Court

• Para 14-15: The Court declined to exercise its discretionary power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and addressed schizophrenia of Applicant No.3, leaving the matter to the trial court under Chapter XXV Cr.P.C.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

• Indian Penal Code (IPC):

  • Section 498-A: Cruelty by husband or relatives.
  • Sections 323, 504, 506: Offenses of causing hurt, intentional insult, and criminal intimidation.
  • Section 34: Common intention.

• Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.):

  • Section 482: Inherent powers of High Court.
  • Section 97: Search for persons wrongfully confined.
  • Section 173: Submission of police report.
  • Chapter XXV: Trial of persons of unsound mind.

• Guardians and Wards Act, 1890:

  • Section 25: Custody of minors.

Ratio Decidendi:

• Compliance with judicial orders is integral to seeking relief under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
• Non-compliance with child custody orders, coupled with allegations of mental and physical cruelty corroborated by witnesses, justifies continuation of criminal proceedings.
• Alleged schizophrenia of one applicant is insufficient to quash proceedings but may be addressed during trial under Cr.P.C.

Subjects:

Dowry harassment, judicial defiance, child custody, inherent powers of the High Court.

Section 498-A IPC, Cruelty, Judicial Orders, Child Custody, Mental Harassment, Section 482 Cr.P.C.