The Supreme Court recently held that criminal proceedings for demand of dowry cannot be quashed merely because of pendency of divorce petition between the husband and wife [Sunita Kumari @ Gudiya v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others].A division bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar was hearing an appeal moved by a wife assailing the decision of the Allahabad High Court which had quashed the criminal proceedings for demand of dowry against her husband on the ground that the wife was suffering from AIDS and that a divorce petition was also stated to be pending between the parties.The High Court was of the view that due to the above, the allegations raised by wife against her husband for demand of dowry are inherently improbable..In the appeal filed by the wife against the decision of the High Court, the Supreme Court noted that the reasoning given by the High Court while quashing the criminal proceedings against the husband was unsustainable."Merely because the wife was suffering from the disease AIDS and/or divorce petition was pending, it cannot be said that the allegations of demand of dowry were highly/inherently improbable and the said proceedings can be said to be bogus proceedings. Therefore, the reasoning given by the High Court while quashing the criminal proceedings are not germane," the Court observed.The Court also noted that the High Court exceeded its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) since at the time when the High Court had passed the order, the chargesheet was already filed against the accused after the investigation found a prima facie case against him."Once the charge sheet was filed after the investigation having been found prima facie case, it cannot be said that the prosecution was bogus. Under the circumstances, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court quashing the criminal proceedings is unsustainable," the Court observed while setting aside the order passed by the High Court.The apex court, therefore, ordered restoration of criminal proceedings against the accused husband..[Read Order]
The Supreme Court recently held that criminal proceedings for demand of dowry cannot be quashed merely because of pendency of divorce petition between the husband and wife [Sunita Kumari @ Gudiya v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others].A division bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar was hearing an appeal moved by a wife assailing the decision of the Allahabad High Court which had quashed the criminal proceedings for demand of dowry against her husband on the ground that the wife was suffering from AIDS and that a divorce petition was also stated to be pending between the parties.The High Court was of the view that due to the above, the allegations raised by wife against her husband for demand of dowry are inherently improbable..In the appeal filed by the wife against the decision of the High Court, the Supreme Court noted that the reasoning given by the High Court while quashing the criminal proceedings against the husband was unsustainable."Merely because the wife was suffering from the disease AIDS and/or divorce petition was pending, it cannot be said that the allegations of demand of dowry were highly/inherently improbable and the said proceedings can be said to be bogus proceedings. Therefore, the reasoning given by the High Court while quashing the criminal proceedings are not germane," the Court observed.The Court also noted that the High Court exceeded its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) since at the time when the High Court had passed the order, the chargesheet was already filed against the accused after the investigation found a prima facie case against him."Once the charge sheet was filed after the investigation having been found prima facie case, it cannot be said that the prosecution was bogus. Under the circumstances, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court quashing the criminal proceedings is unsustainable," the Court observed while setting aside the order passed by the High Court.The apex court, therefore, ordered restoration of criminal proceedings against the accused husband..[Read Order]
