Omnibus allegations against matrimonial relatives, without specific roles, warrant quashing of proceedings.

Respondent No. 2, Smt. Mansi Patel, married Avdhesh Patel on 22 June 2022, and a daughter was born from the marriage on 25 August 2023. On 7 February 2025, she lodged an FIR at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jabalpur, alleging dowry-related physical and mental cruelty by her husband and his family, and alleging that her husband maintained an illicit relationship with Kalpana Patel, wife of his elder brother Bhaiya Ji Patel. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed on 3 June 2025.

Bhaiya Ji Patel and Kalpana Patel, as well as Mahesh Prasad Patel and Smt. Prabha Patel—the husband’s elderly parents—sought quashing of the FIR and charge-sheet under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. They contended that the allegations against them were vague, omnibus and unsupported by any specific incident, date, place or overt act. Bhaiya Ji Patel also relied on service records indicating that he was posted and residing separately.

The State opposed the petitions on the ground that investigation had disclosed sufficient material and that a charge-sheet had been filed.

Whether the FIR and consequential charge-sheet disclosed specific allegations and the necessary ingredients of the alleged offences against Bhaiya Ji Patel, Kalpana Patel, Mahesh Prasad Patel and Smt. Prabha Patel sufficient to justify their prosecution.

Whether continuation of the criminal proceedings against these relatives, in view of the general and omnibus nature of the allegations, would amount to abuse of the process of law warranting exercise of the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS.

The Court applied Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which preserves the High Court’s inherent power to prevent abuse of the process of court and secure the ends of justice.

It held that although the Court ordinarily should not undertake a meticulous evaluation of evidence at the quashing stage, criminal proceedings may be quashed where allegations against relatives in a matrimonial dispute are vague, omnibus and devoid of specific particulars or active participation.

Relying on Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, (2010) 7 SCC 667, Geeta Mehrotra v. State of U.P., (2012) 10 SCC 741, Neelu Chopra v. Bharti, (2009) 10 SCC 184, and Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam v. State of Bihar, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 162, the Court reiterated that general allegations against every member of the matrimonial family, without attribution of a specific role, do not justify continuation of prosecution.

The Court found that the FIR merely alleged collectively that the husband’s family had demanded dowry and harassed the complainant; it did not identify any particular incident, date, place or overt act attributable to any of the four petitioners.

In relation to Bhaiya Ji Patel, the documentary material indicating his posting and separate residence supported the contention that he had not been specifically involved in the alleged matrimonial cruelty.

The allegation against Kalpana Patel primarily concerned the alleged illicit relationship with the complainant’s husband and was not accompanied by any distinct act constituting cruelty or dowry demand.

The allegations against the elderly parents, Mahesh Prasad Patel and Smt. Prabha Patel, were likewise entirely omnibus and disclosed no particular incident showing their active involvement.

Although the husband’s prior complaints alleging that the complainant had left the matrimonial home and threatened to implicate the family were not conclusive, the Court considered them relevant to the broader context.

Applying the principles governing quashing of proceedings against relatives in matrimonial disputes, the Court concluded that the FIR and charge-sheet lacked the requisite specificity and that compelling these petitioners to face trial would constitute abuse of process.

It quashed FIR Crime No. 7/2025 dated 7 February 2025, registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jabalpur, the charge-sheet dated 3 June 2025, and all consequential criminal proceedings insofar as they concerned Bhaiya Ji Patel, Kalpana Patel, Mahesh Prasad Patel and Smt. Prabha Patel.

The proceedings against husband Avdhesh Patel and any other accused against whom specific allegations existed were expressly left unaffected and were directed to continue in accordance with law.