In a recent verdict, the Supreme Court has taken a firm stance on a dowry harassment case, opting to quash the proceedings. The Court asserted that the woman's allegations against her in-laws lacked substance and were seemingly motivated by a desire for revenge. A three-judge panel, including Justices Aniruddha Bose, Sanjay Kumar, and SVN Bhatti, scrutinized the case's facts and circumstances, concluding that the woman's accusations failed to present a compelling case against her in-laws.
The Court's reasoning behind this decision was straightforward: the allegations appeared implausible and far-fetched, making it challenging for any reasonable person to believe there were sufficient grounds for further criminal proceedings. Allowing the case to proceed, under these circumstances, would result in what the Court described as "clear and patent injustice."
This Supreme Court judgment stemmed from a plea challenging a Madhya Pradesh High Court order that had declined to quash proceedings against the woman's former brothers-in-law and mother-in-law. The case had its origins in a divorce, where the woman, a teacher, had earlier filed a written complaint with the police, leveling various allegations against her husband and in-laws.
The Court particularly emphasized that the woman's allegations lacked specificity, providing no concrete details about how and when her brothers-in-law and mother-in-law, who lived in different cities, subjected her to dowry-related harassment. Moreover, it noted the significant delay between the alleged harassment and the formal complaint, raising questions about the veracity of the woman's claims.
The Supreme Court's decision rested on the principle that justice should be tempered with fairness and evidence.
Author: Anushka Taraniya
News Writer, MIT ADT University