Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dealt with two appeals arising from a matrimonial dispute. The complainant wife married the husband on 28 July 2007 and they lived together in Mumbai until separation on 10 June 2009. The husband filed a divorce petition on 24 July 2009. After a gap of over three years, on 28 January 2013, the wife filed a complaint in Delhi seeking registration of FIR against the husband, mother-in-law, brother-in-law, and sister-in-law under Sections 406 and 498A IPC, alleging that her Stridhan articles were in their possession. An FIR was registered on 29 October 2014. On 16 June 2015, the husband deposited the Stridhan articles as per the initial list along with a pay order of Rs.5,98,000 with the investigating officer, as the wife refused to accept them claiming the list was incomplete. A chargesheet was filed on 25 May 2016 against the husband and mother-in-law only. The wife submitted an additional list of Stridhan articles in August and December 2016, more than seven years after the divorce petition. The High Court quashed the FIR under Section 498A IPC against all accused on limitation grounds, and under Section 406 IPC against the husband only, holding that entrustment was alleged only against the mother-in-law. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision regarding Section 498A IPC, noting the FIR was time-barred as it was filed beyond three years from separation. Regarding Section 406 IPC, the Court observed that the husband had already deposited the Stridhan articles and pay order, negating any intention to retain them. The additional list was an afterthought. The Court held that the criminal complaint was a pressure tactic and an abuse of process, and quashed the FIR in its entirety. The appeal by the wife was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Dowry Harassment - Section 498A Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Limitation - Complaint filed beyond three years from date of separation without justification - Held that proceedings under Section 498A IPC are time-barred and liable to be quashed (Paras 13-14). B) Criminal Law - Criminal Breach of Trust - Section 406 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Continuing Offence - Non-return of Stridhan articles gives fresh cause of action each day - However, entrustment must be proved - Where husband deposited Stridhan articles and pay order with police, no intention to retain - Additional list after seven years held as afterthought - Held that Section 406 IPC proceedings also liable to be quashed as abuse of process (Paras 14-16).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR under Sections 498A and 406 IPC was liable to be quashed on grounds of limitation and lack of entrustment.
Final Decision
Appeal by husband (SLP (Crl.) No. 2908 of 2019) allowed; FIR No. 390 of 2014 under Sections 498A/406 IPC quashed in toto. Appeal by wife (SLP (Crl.) Diary No. 9972 of 2019) dismissed.
Law Points
- Limitation for Section 498A IPC
- Continuing offence under Section 406 IPC
- Entrustment as essential ingredient for criminal breach of trust
- Abuse of process of court
