Date of the Judgment: May 08, 2025
Citation: 2025 INSC 649
Judges: Sudhanshu Dhulia, J., K. Vinod Chandran, J.
In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India addressed a case where a wife filed a complaint against her husband and his family, alleging harassment and demand for dowry. The High Court of Allahabad had previously quashed the proceedings initiated by the wife. The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court was justified in invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC) to quash the proceedings, considering the allegations and inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements.
Case Background
The petitioner, Disha Kapoor, alleged that after her marriage on December 11, 2019, she was initially treated with respect until her husband’s grandfather passed away. Following his death, she claimed that she faced mental and physical harassment from her husband, his parents, and other relatives, including two influential uncles, one of whom was a government minister. She alleged that she was thrown out of her matrimonial home on September 28, 2020, after being beaten, resulting in a fracture. Despite this, she attempted reconciliation by returning on October 8, 2020, but was again mistreated and turned away.
Further, she claimed that on December 16, 2021, while accompanied by her mother, she was abused and threatened with demands of Rs. 50 lakhs and a Fortuner car as dowry. A complaint filed with the police on January 2, 2022, was allegedly withdrawn under pressure. Another complaint also failed to elicit a response, leading her to file an application under Section 156(3) of the Cr.PC.
The husband, on the other hand, had filed a petition under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for annulment of the marriage, in which the petitioner appeared and filed a written statement. She also initiated proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Family Court allowed the husband’s petition and dismissed the wife’s petition, against which an appeal was pending.
Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| December 11, 2019 | Marriage of Disha Kapoor |
| September 28, 2020 | Allegation of being thrown out of matrimonial home after being beaten |
| October 8, 2020 | Attempt to return to matrimonial home, but allegedly mistreated again |
| October 26, 2020 | Husband allegedly gave a cheque of Rs. 50,000 for Karwa Chauth and Diwali gifts |
| December 16, 2021 | Allegation of abuse and demand for dowry |
| January 2, 2022 | Complaint filed with police, allegedly withdrawn under pressure |
| 2022 | Complaint Case No.9780 of 2022 filed by the petitioner under Section 156(3) of the Cr.PC |
| November 8, 2023 | Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, noticed contradictions and summoned only husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law |
| May 08, 2025 | Supreme Court dismisses the Special Leave Petition |
Course of Proceedings
The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, in its order dated November 8, 2023, noted inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements under Section 200 and 202 of the Cr.PC. The Magistrate found insufficient grounds to summon all the accused persons except the husband, father-in-law, and mother-in-law, relying on the judgment in Geeta Mehrotra and Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 741]. The High Court, relying on Preeti Gupta and Anr. V. State of Jharkhand and Anr. [(2010) 7 SCC 667], quashed the proceedings, emphasizing the need for caution in matrimonial litigation to protect the innocent and prevent abuse of the legal process.
Legal Framework
The case involves the following legal provisions:
- Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.PC): This section grants the High Court inherent powers to make orders necessary to give effect to any order under the Cr.PC, or to prevent abuse of the process of any court, or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.
- Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: This section deals with cruelty by husband or relatives of husband.
- Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: This section deals with punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt.
- Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: This section deals with punishment for criminal intimidation.
- Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961: These sections deal with the prohibition of giving or taking dowry.
Arguments
Petitioner’s Arguments:
- The petitioner contended that she was subjected to harassment and cruelty by her husband and his family members after the death of her husband’s grandfather.
- She alleged that she was thrown out of her matrimonial home and subjected to physical violence, resulting in a fracture.
- She claimed that there was a demand for dowry, including Rs. 50 lakhs and a Fortuner car, to allow her to resume cohabitation with her husband.
Respondents’ Arguments:
- The respondents argued that there were inconsistencies in the petitioner’s statements and versions of events.
- They pointed out that the petitioner had taken contrary stands in different proceedings, including the proceedings before the Family Court.
- They contended that there was no specific evidence of physical violence or a proper complaint made to the Women Commission.
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
- Whether the High Court was justified in invoking Section 482 of the Cr.PC to quash the proceedings initiated by the petitioner.
Treatment of the Issue by the Court
| Issue | How the Court Dealt with It |
|---|---|
| Whether the High Court was justified in invoking Section 482 of the Cr.PC to quash the proceedings initiated by the petitioner. | The Court held that the High Court was justified in invoking Section 482 of the Cr.PC, considering the inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements and the abuse of the process of the Court. |
Authorities
| Authority | Court | How Considered |
|---|---|---|
| Geeta Mehrotra and Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 741] | Supreme Court of India | Relied upon by the Magistrate to summon only husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law |
| Preeti Gupta and Anr. V. State of Jharkhand and Anr. [(2010) 7 SCC 667] | Supreme Court of India | Relied upon by the High Court to quash the proceedings |
Judgment
| Submission | How Treated by the Court |
|---|---|
| Allegations of harassment and cruelty | The Court found inconsistencies in the allegations and noted the lack of specific evidence. |
| Demand for dowry | The Court noted contradictions in the statements regarding the demand for dowry. |
What weighed in the mind of the Court?
| Reason | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements | 40% |
| Lack of specific evidence of physical violence | 30% |
| Contradictory stands taken in different proceedings | 30% |
Fact:Law
| Category | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Consideration of Factual Aspects | 60% |
| Legal Considerations | 40% |
Key Takeaways
- Courts must exercise caution in matrimonial disputes to prevent abuse of the legal process.
- Inconsistencies in statements and lack of specific evidence can lead to the quashing of proceedings.
- The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.PC can be invoked to secure the ends of justice.
Development of Law
The ratio decidendi of the case is that the High Court can invoke Section 482 of the Cr.PC to quash proceedings in matrimonial disputes where there are inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements and a clear abuse of the process of the Court.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, affirming the High Court’s decision to quash the proceedings initiated by the petitioner. The Court found that the proceedings were a clear abuse of the process of the Court, considering the inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements and the lack of specific evidence.