Criminal proceedings cannot be used as tool of harassment to settle matrimonial dispute: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh recently ruled that criminal proceedings cannot be used as a tool of harassment for settling matrimonial disputes (Subhash Chander v. State of J&K).Justice Rajnesh Oswal held in a matrimonial dispute,"It is settled law that criminal proceedings cannot be used as a tool of harassment for settling the matrimonial dispute. As per the own admission of the respondent-wife, that her husband, who is not a party to the present petition, had been residing with her in her parental house with effect from October 2015 till December 2016 and in view of the fact that the allegations levelled against the petitioners are vague, bereft of necessary particulars, continuance of such proceedings shall be nothing but an abuse of process of law.".The Court was hearing a plea filed by the relatives of a man to quash the first information report (FIR) registered against them alleging commission of offences under Section 498-A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty), 342 (punishment for wrongful confinement), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) in 2017.It was contended that the criminal proceedings were initiated by the respondent-wife just to harass them..The couple met through a matrimonial site and later solemnized their marriage, which was not attended by the man's family.The petitioners claimed that the respondent-wife stayed at the matrimonial house for a period of five months. After marriage, she started showing a lack of concern towards her husband and other family members and left the company of her husband without any reasonable cause.When the woman and her mother were approached by the petitioners to return to matrimonial home, they both flatly refused. However, she agreed to continue the marriage if her husband resided with her at her parental house and leave his old parents and children from his first marriage. Subsequently, the husband agreed and started residing with her at her parental house.The petitioners claimed that the wife physically assaulted her husband and confined him in a room. The man's father approached the police to get his son released from his wife's home. They then filed a police complaint against the respondent-wife.As a counterblast, the wife filed a complaint against the petitioners on the basis of which an FIR was registered. She claimed that her husband ill-treated her and that her in-laws would physically and verbally abuse for not paying enough dowry..Counsel for the petitioners argued that his clients have been implicated in the case just to harass them. Perusal of the charge-sheet as well as the FIR and evidence collected would reveal that the petitioners have not committed any offence and that the respondent-wife has admitted that she had been residing in her mother's house from August 2015, he submitted..However, counsel for the respondent-wife vehemently argued that there are specific allegations against the petitioners, and as such, the charge-sheet against them cannot be quashed..The High Court accepted the contention raised by the counsel for the petitioners that the allegations levelled by the respondent-wife are in fact against her husband and it is evident that the petitioners have been unnecessarily arrayed as accused in the FIR.."This Court is of the considered view that the proceedings in the charge-sheet arising out of the FIR registered against petitioners for the commission of offences under Section 498-A, 342, 504 and 506 RPC are required to be quashed qua the petitioners only, as the husband of the respondent-wife has not filed the present petition," the High Court ordered..Advocate Aftab Malik appeared for the petitioners.Deputy Advocate General PD Singh represented the State, while Advocate Vilakshan Singh appeared for the respondent-wife.