Supreme Court: In twin appeals challenging common judgment passed by the Uttaranchal High Court quashing the First Information Report (‘FIR’) lodged by the appellant wife against her husband for pronouncing triple talaq, the Division Bench of S. Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar, JJ. set aside the impugned order quashing FIR for triple talaq and directed the Trial Court to proceed with the matter.
Background
It was alleged by the wife in the said FIR that she was subjected to physical abuse by her husband, who had pronounced triple talaq and was in relationship with another woman. FIR was registered for commission of offences under Section 498-A and 323 of Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and Sections 3/4 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 (‘2019 Act’).
It was submitted on behalf of the husband that the High Court erred in not quashing the offence alleged under Section 323 of IPC, since the parties were having smooth relationship and lived peacefully together for 13+ years, and that the cause of friction was some family dispute. On the other hand, his wife and the State submitted that the impugned order of the High Court quashing the Sections 498-A of IPC and Sections 3/4 of 2019 Act was unwarranted since the chargesheet filed after investigation depicted committing all three offences.
Court’s Decision
The Court perused the said FIR and noted that the allegations clearly pointed towards the essential elements that the wife was subjected to cruelty through words ‘beaten’, the husband had pronounced triple talaq which was outlawed after the 2019 Act and made a punishable offence. The Court opined that quashing of FIR pertaining to allegations of offence under Section 498-A of IPC and Sections 3/4 of 2019 Act was uncalled for. Therefore, the Court allowed the wife’s appeal in the instant matter and set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court to that extent. The Court also directed the Trial Court to go ahead with the proceedings from the stage where they were when the impugned judgment was pronounced.
[Mansoor Ali v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1121, Order dated 29-08-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioners: Advocate on Record Shashi Kiran, Advocate Dr Satish Chandra, Advocate Arjun Sain, Advocate Sangeeta Bhalla, Advocate Manish Shukla, Advocate on Record Namit Saxena
For Respondents: Advocate on Record Namit Saxena, Advocate on Record Ravindra S. Garia, Advocate Shashank Singh, Advocate Vikas Negi, Advocate Madan Chandra, Advocate on Record Jaswant Singh Rawat, Advocate Ikshita Parihar, Advocate Vikas Negi, Advocate on Record Shashi Kiran, Advocate Dr. Satish Chandra, Advocate Arjun Sain, Advocate Sangeeta Bhalla, Advocate Manish Shukla
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
