Claims of ‘instigation’ by in-laws not enough to prosecute: K’taka HC | Bengaluru News

Bengaluru: In its recent judgment, Karnataka high court observed that the mere assertion that in-laws “instigated” the husband or used abusive language, without any specific instance of such misdemeanour, cannot form the foundation for criminal prosecution.Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum came up with this observation while quashing the proceedings against one Abeda, her husband Mohammad Runkuddin Jumna, and five others. Justice Magadum noted that if the court declines to exercise its inherent jurisdiction, then the petitioners “would be unnecessarily subjected to the rigmarole of criminal prosecution”.Under the circumstances, continuation of proceedings against the petitioners would amount to abuse of the process of law, the judge further explained while quashing the case against the in-laws.The couple in question, residents of Kalaburagi city, along with their family members, had challenged the FIR registered by the women’s police station and the pending proceedings before the local court, based on a complaint filed by Tehseen Begum, their daughter-in-law.According to the petitioners, in her written complaint dated July 22, 2023, Tehseen acknowledged that she resided separately with her husband Nooruddin Jumna. “All allegations pertaining to neglect, marital discord, and harassment are specifically directed only at Nooruddin. There are absolutely no individual or specific allegations against any of us. Despite this, we have been arrayed as accused,” the petitioners claimed. After perusing the materials on record, Justice Magadum noted: “The complainant explicitly acknowledges that there was a family partition, pursuant to which, a separate residential portion comprising three rooms was allotted. This itself indicates that the petitioners lived separately and did not share the common household with the complainant.” The judge further observed: “The complaint also repeatedly refers to the prolonged stays of Nooruddin in the Gulf region, which appears to be the primary reason for the marital discord. The allegations against the petitioners are, therefore, unsubstantiated, lacking any particulars of date, time, place, or specific acts.”