LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/dara-lakshmi-narayana-others-vs-state-of-telangana-another-20241210/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Dara Lakshmi Narayana & Others vs State of Telangana & Another

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
10 December 2024
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 5199 of 2024
Result
Allowed
Bench
B.V. Nagarathna, N Kotiswar Singh
Citation
[2024] 12 S.C.R. 559 : 2024 INSC 953
Acts & Sections
CrPC IPC Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
Supreme Court Reports [2024] 12 S.C.R. 559 : 2024 INSC 953
Issue for consideration
In the facts and circumstances of the case and after examining the FIR, whether the High Court was correct in refusing to quash the ongoing criminal proceedings against the appellants under Section 498A of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Act.
Headnote

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Penal Code, 1860 – s.498A – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – ss.3, 4 – Refusal to quash criminal proceedings, when not justified – FIR lodged by respondent No.2-wife against appellants under Section 498A, IPC and Sections 3 and 4, Dowry Act – Appellants sought quashing of the criminal proceedings – Refused by High Court – Challenge to:

Held: Respondent No.2 left the matrimonial house after quarrelling with appellant No.1-husband with respect to her interactions with a third person in their marriage – Later, she came back assuring to have a cordial relationship however, once again left the matrimonial house – Complaint under Section 498A, IPC was lodged by the respondent No.2 as a counterblast to the petition for dissolution of marriage sought by the appellant No.1 – No substantial and specific allegations were made against appellant Nos.2 to 6 (family members of appellant No.1) other than stating that they used to instigate appellant No.1 for demanding more dowry – Allegations against the appellants were vague and omnibus, too far-fetched and not believable – Appellant Nos.2 to 6 were living in different cities and admittedly, never resided with the couple and their children – FIR filed by respondent No.2 was initiated with ulterior motives and is not a genuine complaint rather it is a retaliatory measure intended to settle scores with appellant No.1 and his family members – Present case falls within category (7) of illustrative parameters highlighted in Bhajan Lal case – High Court erred in not exercising the powers under Section 482, CrPC – Impugned order set aside – Quashing petition allowed – FIR under Section 498A, IPC and Sections 3 and 4, Dowry Act, chargesheet and the trial pending against the appellants, quashed. [Paras 21, 22, 24-26, 29, 32, 33]

Penal Code, 1860 – s.498A – Growing misuse of, to seek compliance with the unreasonable demands of a wife – Matrimonial discords – Implication of all the members of the husband’s family without specific allegations indicating their active involvement – Generalised and sweeping accusations unsupported by concrete evidence – Practice deprecated – Cautioned against prosecuting the husband and his family in the absence of a clear prima facie case.

Words and Phrases – ‘Cruelty’ – Penal Code, 1860 – s.498A – Discussed.

Keywords: Quashing · Refusal to quash · FIR · Ongoing criminal proceedings · Complaint under Section 498A, IPC · Matrimonial house/home · Counterblast · Petition for dissolution of marriage · Family members of husband · No substantial and specific allegations · Harassment of innocent family members · Family members living in different cities · Instigate · No harassment for dowry · Allegations vague and omnibus · Matrimonial dispute/discord · Domestic disputes · Ulterior motives · Cruelty · Not a genuine complaint

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment Nagarathna, J. Leave granted. 2. Being aggrieved by the order dated 16.02.2022 passed by the High Court for the State of Telangana in Criminal Petition No.1479 of 2022 refusing to quash the criminal proceedings in FIR No.82 of 2022 dated 01.02.2022 registered with Neredmet Police Station, Rachakonda against the appellant Nos.1 to 6 herein (collectively referred as “appellants”) under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”, for short) and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (“Dowry Act”, for short), the appellants have preferred this appeal. 3. Briefly state
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →