After 3 years of divorce, the Supreme Court surprised the complaint of dowry harassment, said- ‘We do not hesitate at all…’

The Supreme Court dismisses complaint of dowry harassment by a woman by a woman filed against her husband and relatives Is. In which the court said, ‘The relatives of the husband in this case are being wrongly harassed. Three years after divorce between husband and wife, a complaint was not filed under dowry harassment and section 498 (A). He said, “When there is no relationship between the two, how can the husband and his family bother him for dowry?”

Husband and relatives falsely accused

Keeping in mind their previous decisions, a bench of Supreme Court Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra said, “We have no hesitation in saying that the husband’s relatives have been incorrectly accused in this case.” Because, his names have been lodged in the complaint but no allegations have been made against him.

A woman from Uttar Pradesh lodged a complaint of dowry harassment three years after divorce

This whole matter is from Uttar Pradesh. Earlier, the Allahabad High Court had refused to cancel the summons of the lower court against the husband’s relatives, so an appeal was filed in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court said in its judgment that a complaint was filed against husband and relatives in August 2015. In 2010, the woman left her husband’s house and started living with her parents. The in -laws claimed that the husband had gone to bring him back. However, the husband later filed a divorce application in the court after his wife refused. In 2012, three years after the divorce, the woman filed an appeal before the magistrate to register a case of dowry harassment.

Supreme Court rejected the petition

The wife claimed that in 2015 my husband and in -laws came to my house and demanded dowry from me. Along with this, threats were also given. The magistrate accepted the application as a complaint and sent summons. However, the Supreme Court later commented that it is difficult to believe that the husband and his family would have gone to the wife’s house and tried to reconcile them after the two were separated. Perhaps even if any such incident had happened, the relationship between the complainant woman and the accused as a husband and wife would have already broken, so a case would not have been made against the husband and his relatives under Section 498 (A) of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.