In Dr. Hiralal Konar & Anr. v. The State of West Bengal and Anr., Calcutta HC quashed criminal proceedings initiated by a wife against her husband and in-laws under various provisions of IPC, Dowry Prohibition Act, Juvenile Justice Act, and the SC/ST Act. The case arose out of a complaint lodged by the wife alleging cruelty, dowry demands, and caste based slurs.

The wife had lodged a written complaint with Patuli Police Station on 15 March 2022, alleging that from the beginning of her conjugal life, her husband was unsuitable for her, and her in-laws mocked her for her caste and verbally abused her.

She alleged physical assaults, an attempt to strangulate her, pressure to pay EMIs for a jointly purchased apartment, and instances where her mother-in-law forced her to feed the child even when child was not hungry. She further alleged cruelty towards her minor daughter.

Based on this complaint, a case was registered u/s 498A,406,506,34 IPC, Sections 3,4 of DP Act, Section 75 of JJ Act, and Section 3(1)(u) of SC/ST Act. The petitioners argued that the chargesheet was filed mechanically without proper application of mind, that the allegations were vague, concocted, and lacked necessary particulars, and that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process.

High Court examined the allegations and noted that except for two specific date, 14.07.2017 and November 2020, no other time, place, or particulars of cruelty were mentioned. Court observed that the wife had failed to produce any medical report or treatment papers to support the allegations of assault or strangulation. It also noted that allegations of dowry harassment or misappropriation of stridhan articles were not substantiated during investigation.

Court also found that no role was attributed to specific accused persons, and independent witnesses had not corroborated the version of the complainant. One neighbour residing on 2 floor of the same premises deposed that he had neither heard quarrels nor witnessed assaults and had not noticed any matrimonial discord between the parties.

With respect to the SC/ST Act, Court noted that the alleged caste-based remarks were made inside the house and not in public view, which is a necessary ingredient to attract Section 3 of the Act. It further held that Section 406 IPC was inapplicable since the stridhan articles had been seized during investigation, and Section 506 IPC could not be sustained in the absence of specific threats being detailed.

Court further observed that the complainant had married the petitioner after a love relationship and that her allegations of long-standing cruelty were contradicted by her silence from 2011 until 2022.

Therefore, finding the allegations vague, unsubstantiated, and legally insufficient to constitute offences under the IPC, Dowry Prohibition Act, Juvenile Justice Act, or SC/ST Act, the Calcutta High Court quashed the proceedings.