Punjab and Haryana High Court Criticizes Magistrate for Rejecting Cancellation Report in Section 498A Case

While dealing with cancellation report filed in cases of matrimonial discord, a court ought to proceed in a compassionate manner and not with a pedantic approach, the High Court said.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently voiced disapproval towards a Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) for refusing to accept the cancellation report submitted by the police in a case under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to cruelty by a husband or his relatives towards a woman.

Justice Sumeet Goel questioned the CJM’s decision to direct the police to further investigate the case, even though the complainant did not object to the case being canceled.

“The Court while dealing with cancellation report filed in such like case; which stem out of matrimonial discord between the parties especially in the backdrop of acceptance of such cancellation by the complainant herself; ought to proceed in a compassionate manner and not with a pedantic approach,” the Court remarked.

It added that compromise is essential for harmony and orderly behavior in a modern society.

“It is the soul of justice and if the process of the Court is used in furtherance of such harmonious atmosphere it would certainly promote amity between the parties leading to an orderly and tranquil society.”

The Court made these observations while addressing a petition to quash a 2015 FIR filed following a woman’s complaint that she and her husband were forcibly evicted from their ancestral home by her in-laws.

After investigating, the police submitted a cancellation report for the case.

However, the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) in Moga rejected the report on February 22, 2021, stating that the offense was not compoundable and suggesting the report was filed to circumvent legal proceedings.

The accused in-laws then approached the High Court to quash the FIR on its merits. Neither the State nor the complainant responded to the quashing petition.

The Court concluded that the allegations did not, in any way, constitute an offense under Section 498A of the IPC.

“The request made by the complainant to the police in the FIR that she and her husband be put back in the house of petitioners, is the linchpin to gather the nature of dispute between the parties which, even if founded on legitimate cause, is clearly of civil in nature. The allegations in the FIR on the face of it do not give rise to any criminal offence,” it added.

The Court consequently quashed the FIR and the proceedings pending before the trial court.

In its concluding remarks, the Court explained its disagreement with the CJM’s refusal to close the case, noting that the CJM had not identified any evidence indicating the commission of an offense under Section 498A IPC.

“A thorough reading of the FIR, wherein no allegation pertaining to demand of dowry has been mentioned, coupled with the factum of cancellation report filed by the police and acceptance of such cancellation by the complainant herself; exhibits the faux pas by the Chief Judicial Magistrate in the matter while rejecting the cancellation report filed by the police,” Justice Goel said.