Contradictory FIRs, no medical proof: Cal HC quashes cruelty case

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has quashed a dowry-cruelty case against a woman’s in-laws after finding that the complaint appeared to be driven by “a desire for retribution” and was undermined by major contradictions across three FIRs filed in quick succession in 2017.

Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee noted that the case record contained three separate FIRs—one lodged by the husband on April 29, another by his brother on May 7 after the husband’s suicide on May 6, and a third by the wife on May 29. The three accounts, the court said, were materially different and could not support a consistent prosecution narrative.

The court observed that the wife’s complaint did not describe specific acts attributable to individual in-laws and relied instead on broad statements that “all accused persons” had assaulted or harassed her. It added that although the FIR claimed prolonged physical torture, no treatment papers, injury descriptions or medical records were produced from the couple’s 19-year marriage to support those assertions. Examining the charge sheet and witness statements, the court found no allegations that met the legal ingredients of cruelty under either limb of Section 498A.

There were no facts indicating conduct likely to drive the complainant to suicide, and no material suggesting harassment for unlawful demands.

The order also noted that when multiple FIRs emerge around the same dispute, courts are required to assess the surrounding circumstances to determine whether the criminal process is being invoked out of personal grudge. In this case, the court said the sequence of events and the inconsistencies across the FIRs indicated that the allegations were largely omnibus and unsupported by independent evidence.

Finding that the materials did not disclose any cognisable offence against the petitioners and that allowing the case to proceed would amount to misuse of the process of law, the High Court quashed the proceedings. It directed that certified copies of the judgment be supplied to the parties on application.