BENGALURU: Neighbours cannot be casually implicated in dowry harassment cases, the Karnataka High Court has held while quashing criminal proceedings against a woman dragged into a matrimonial dispute.
Granting relief to Bengaluru resident Asha G, the court set aside proceedings initiated on a complaint filed by her neighbour, Munirathnamma. Observing that Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code applies only to a husband, wife or their family members, the court said a “stranger cannot be drawn into the proceedings” under the provision.
The case stemmed from a complaint lodged on February 13, 2021, at Mahalakshmi Layout police station, in which Munirathnamma accused her husband, Muthuram, his family members and Asha, who lived next door, of cruelty and harassment. Police registered a case under Sections 498A, 504, 506 and 323 of the IPC and later filed a chargesheet naming Asha as accused number five, alleging that she had instigated the husband against his wife.
Challenging the proceedings, Asha argued that she had no role in the complainant’s matrimonial life and was “only a neighbour”. She contended that the solitary allegation of instigation was insufficient to implicate her in a dowry harassment case and claimed she had been named as an accused due to personal animosity.
Opposing the plea, Munirathnamma maintained that Asha was “the reason for all the behaviour” of her husband and should face trial.
Justice M Nagaprasanna, after examining the chargesheet and records, noted that Asha’s name appeared “nowhere except for the contention that she instigated the husband to torture the wife”. The court held that she did not fall within the definition of “family” as envisaged under Section 498A.
Citing a Supreme Court ruling, the judge reiterated that the apex court had clearly held that strangers cannot be prosecuted for offences under Section 498A. Allowing the case to continue against Asha, the court said, would amount to an abuse of the legal process and result in a miscarriage of justice.
Accordingly, the high court quashed the proceedings pending before the chief metropolitan magistrate, Bengaluru, insofar as they related to Asha.
Justice Nagaprasanna clarified that the observations were limited to the petitioner’s case and would not affect the proceedings against the other accused or influence the trial in any manner.
