{"id":249666,"date":"2021-06-11T14:45:49","date_gmt":"2021-06-11T09:15:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=249666"},"modified":"2021-06-25T12:52:36","modified_gmt":"2021-06-25T07:22:36","slug":"harassment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/","title":{"rendered":"Tel HC | Can cousin of a husband who was accused of offence under S. 498-A IPC be also roped in on grounds of instigating and supporting husband? Read on"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Telangana High Court: <\/strong>K. Lakshman, J., allowed a criminal petition and quashed a criminal case filed against the petitioner-accused as the ingredients of the alleged offence were lacking in the contents of the charge sheet.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Present criminal petition was filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Petitioner was accused of offences under Section 498-A Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The only allegation against accused 4 was that he stayed with the daughter of respondent 1\/victim along with accused 1, cousin of the petitioner and during that period, accused 4 supported and instigated the accused and abused daughter of respondent 1, though he was in no way concerned.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It was submitted that petitioner\/accused 4 was unnecessarily implicated as he had nothing to do with the matrimonial life of the victim and accused 1.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Supreme Court in the decision of <em>Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, <\/em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/mVxu6Vxn\">(2010) 7 SCC 667<\/a>, dealt with Section 498-A IPC as to social responsibility and obligations to maintain social fibre of family life.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In another decision, Supreme Court in <em>Geeta Mehrotra v. State of U.P., <\/em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/Qi7d6c9Y\">(2012) 10 SCC 741<\/a>, it was held that mere casual reference of names of family members in a matrimonial dispute without allegation of active involvement in the matter would not justify taking cognizance against them overlooking the fact borne out of experience that there is a tendency to involve the entire family members of the household in the domestic quarrel taking place in a matrimonial dispute specifically if it happens soon after the wedding. It is further held that even if there are allegations of overt act indicating the complicity of the members of the family named in the First Information Report in a given case, cognizance would be unjustified but if the First Information Report does not disclose specific allegation against the accused more so, against the co-accused specifically in a matter arising out of matrimonial bickering, it would be a clear abuse of the legal and judicial process to mechanically send the named accused in the First Information Report to undergo the trial unless of course, the First Information Report discloses specific allegations which would persuade the Court to take cognizance of the offence alleged against the relatives of the main accused who are prima facie not found to have indulged in physical and mental torture of the complainant wife.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In <em>Rajesh Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh<\/em>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/BO1u6305\">(2018) 10 SCC 472<\/a>, the Supreme Court, considering the misuse of Section 498-A IPC and remedial measures etc., gave certain directions.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Bench stated that in view of the above-stated law laid down by the Supreme Court, the name of the petitioner\/A4 was not there in the complaint. In the Charge Sheet, there was no mention of the basis on which the name of the petitioner was shown.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Court stated that the only allegation against the petitioner was that he stayed with accused 1 and victim in a flat and had supported and instigated accused and also abused victim, even though he was in no way concerned.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Hence, there was no mention of the alleged harassment of the victim by the petitioner\/accused 4.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Petitioner\/A.4 stayed for about 1 \u00bd year and during that period he used to support and instigate A.1 to abuse the victim. Thus, even in the statement of victim, there was no mention of the alleged harassment of the victim by the petitioner\/A.4.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In view of the above discussion, ingredients of Section 498-A IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the DP Act were lacking in the contents of the charge sheet. Therefore, Court opined that proceedings against petitioner\/A4 cannot be continued and were liable to be quashed. [Gundapaneni Rakesh v. Thatiparthi Jithender, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/Wwp2TSze\"><b>2021 SCC OnLine TS 677<\/b><\/a>, decided on 01-06-2021]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Advocates before the Court:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For Petitioner: K. Venu Madhav<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For Respondent 1: A. Prabhakar Rao<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For Respondent 2: Assistant Public Prosecutor<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Telangana High Court: K. Lakshman, J., allowed a criminal petition and quashed a criminal case filed against the petitioner-accused as the ingredients <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[43975,3067,3000,29785,31299,33941],"class_list":["post-249666","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-dowry-prohibition","tag-FIR","tag-harassment","tag-law","tag-section-498-a-ipc","tag-telangana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Tel HC | Can cousin of a husband who was accused of offence under S. 498-A IPC be also roped in on grounds of instigating and supporting husband? Read on | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Harassment\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Tel HC | Can cousin of a husband who was accused of offence under S. 498-A IPC be also roped in on grounds of instigating and supporting husband? Read on\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Harassment\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-06-11T09:15:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-06-25T07:22:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/AP-TELANGANA-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/\",\"name\":\"Tel HC | Can cousin of a husband who was accused of offence under S. 498-A IPC be also roped in on grounds of instigating and supporting husband? Read on | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-06-11T09:15:49+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-06-25T07:22:36+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"Harassment\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Tel HC | Can cousin of a husband who was accused of offence under S. 498-A IPC be also roped in on grounds of instigating and supporting husband? Read on\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Tel HC | Can cousin of a husband who was accused of offence under S. 498-A IPC be also roped in on grounds of instigating and supporting husband? Read on | SCC Times","description":"Harassment","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Tel HC | Can cousin of a husband who was accused of offence under S. 498-A IPC be also roped in on grounds of instigating and supporting husband? Read on","og_description":"Harassment","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-06-11T09:15:49+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-06-25T07:22:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/AP-TELANGANA-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/","name":"Tel HC | Can cousin of a husband who was accused of offence under S. 498-A IPC be also roped in on grounds of instigating and supporting husband? Read on | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-06-11T09:15:49+00:00","dateModified":"2021-06-25T07:22:36+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"Harassment","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/11\/harassment\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Tel HC | Can cousin of a husband who was accused of offence under S. 498-A IPC be also roped in on grounds of instigating and supporting husband? Read on"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":250539,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/30\/bigamy\/","url_meta":{"origin":249666,"position":0},"title":"Telangana HC | In what conditions a complaint of bigamy filed by wife is maintainable when another complaint under S. 498-A IPC is already pending? Court discusses","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 30, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Telangana High Court: K. Lakshman, J., refused to quash a subsequent complaint filed by the wife against her husband (and others), where a prior complaint alleging offence under Section 498-A Penal Code, 1860 was already pending. Instant criminal petition was filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Petitioners\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":269065,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/27\/karnataka-high-court-illicit-relationship-with-husband-of-the-complainant-not-necessary-ground-to-constitute-offence-under-s-498-a-ipc\/","url_meta":{"origin":249666,"position":1},"title":"Karnataka High Court | Illicit relationship with husband of the complainant not necessary ground to constitute offence under S. 498-A IPC","author":"Editor","date":"June 27, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Karnataka High Court: Hemant Chandangoudar J. quashed the FIR against accused 5 being the woman who had illicit relations with the husband of the complainant, for the offence punishable under Section 498-A Penal Code, 1860 (\u2018IPC'). An FIR was filed by R2, being the legally wedded wife of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Karnataka High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/New_Karnataka.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/New_Karnataka.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/New_Karnataka.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/New_Karnataka.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/New_Karnataka.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":238575,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/05\/telangana-hc-restating-the-law-on-permissibility-of-quashing-of-criminal-proceedings-court-directs-sho-to-conduct-investigation-following-s-41-a-crpc\/","url_meta":{"origin":249666,"position":2},"title":"Telangana HC | Restating the law on permissibility of quashing of criminal proceedings, Court directs SHO to conduct investigation following S. 41-A CrPC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 5, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Telangana High Court:\u00a0K. Lakshman, J., addressed an issue in the criminal petition in light of Section 41-A of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and the essence of quashing criminal proceedings was thrown light upon by citing the Supreme Court decision in Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar v. State of Maharashtra,\u00a0(2019) 14 SCC\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":189143,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/15\/mere-casual-allegations-not-sufficient-constitute-offence-s-498-ipc\/","url_meta":{"origin":249666,"position":3},"title":"Mere casual allegations are not sufficient to constitute an offence under S. 498-A  IPC","author":"Saba","date":"February 15, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of K.N. Phaneendra, J., decided a criminal petition filed under Section 482 of CrPC, wherein the proceedings against the petitioner before the trial court under Section 498-A IPC and other sections were quashed. The petitioner was the brother of Accused 1 and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":325333,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/29\/paramour-accused-498a-ipc-criminal-proceedingspetition-allowed-karnataka-hc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":249666,"position":4},"title":"Paramour of an accused cannot be dragged into proceedings under Section 498A of IPC; Karnataka HC reiterates","author":"Editor","date":"June 29, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court pointed out that a paramour of an accused cannot be dragged into proceedings under Section 498A of IPC as the said accused would not become a relative or a member of the family as is necessary under Section 498A of IPC.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Karnataka High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":293203,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/26\/admonishing-wife-for-having-illicit-intimacy-will-not-amount-to-abetting-wife-to-commit-suicide-telangana-high-court-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":249666,"position":5},"title":"Admonishing wife for having illicit intimacy will not amount to abetting wife to commit suicide: Telangana High Court","author":"Simranjeet","date":"May 26, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A wife having illicit intimacy with another person will adversely affect the husband and family, both personally and in society. The husband cannot sit quite if the wife is having illicit intimacy with another person.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"telangana high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/telangana-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/telangana-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/telangana-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/telangana-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249666","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=249666"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249666\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=249666"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=249666"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=249666"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}