The appellants — father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant — challenged a Patna High Court order that quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 341, 323, 498A & 34 IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against the sister-in-law alone, while declining identical relief to them. FIR No. 81/2022 had been registered at Police Station Lalit Narayan University, Darbhanga, alleging persistent dowry-related cruelty and an attempt to strangulate the complainant on 18th March 2022. The Judicial Magistrate took cognizance on 7th September 2022; the High Court partly allowed the Section 482 CrPC petition only for the sister-in-law on the ground that the allegations against her were general and omnibus.
The Supreme Court allowed the criminal appeal and set aside the impugned order to the extent it refused relief to the appellants. A comparative reading of the FIR showed that the allegations against the appellants and the sister-in-law were, in all material particulars, identical — no specific dates, places, or overt acts were attributed to either appellant. The lone distinct allegation — that the appellants "would quarrel" — does not constitute a criminal offence and cannot by itself sustain cognizance. The Court held that the High Court applied different standards to persons standing on an identical footing, which is impermissible.
The Court additionally noted that the criminal complaint was lodged in March 2022, nearly a year after the husband filed a divorce petition in March 2021 — approximately 21 months after the marriage. While delay alone is insufficient to quash proceedings, read conjunctively with the absence of specific allegations, it lent credence to the submission that the complaint was a counter-blast to the divorce proceedings. All proceedings arising out of L.N.M.U. P.S. Case No. 81 of 2022 were quashed as against the appellants; proceedings against the husband, who had not sought quashing, were expressly left undisturbed.