4 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Aug 4, 2026 02:28 PM IST
Taking note of “serious” allegations that the woman was harassed after the death of her girl child for not giving birth to a male child and was told that the child, born in ‘atham nakshathram’ (born under a particular star), was “ill-omened” for her husband, the Kerala High Court recently refused to cancel criminal proceedings against a man and his family members in a dowry harassment case.
Justice Jobin Sebastian was hearing a plea filed by the husband and four of his family members, who were accused of subjecting the woman to cruelty and sought quashing of the FIR and the final report pending before the trial court.
“In the FIS (First Information Statement), it is specifically alleged that, after the death of a girl child, accused numbers 2 to 4 harassed her for not giving birth to a male child. Moreover, they stated that the girl child born in ‘Atham nakshathram’ is ill-omened for her husband. There is a further allegation that the accused used to harass the de facto complainant mentally by stating that the dowry brought in by her was insufficient. Undoubtedly, the allegations are of a serious nature,” the August 3 order read.
The high court dismissed the man and other accused’s plea, stating that if the allegations contained in the First Information Statement are accepted in their entirety, they disclose the offence of cruelty at the hands of the man.
The court pointed out that criminal proceedings can be quashed only if the allegations in the complaint, taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not make out a case against the accused. It clarified that while deciding a quashing petition, the court cannot conduct a mini-trial or assess the truthfulness of the allegations, which must be decided during the trial.
Cruel with wife
The prosecution claimed that the complainant married the first accused in January 2019. After marriage, while both of them were residing together as husband and wife in the matrimonial home, it was claimed that the husband and his family subjected the woman to cruelty, both mentally and physically, alleging that the dowry brought by her was insufficient.
It was further alleged that on a day in February 2020, one of the accused physically assaulted her, and when her parents intervened, the accused assaulted them also.
Story continues below this ad
The complaint filed by the woman also alleged that after the death of her girl child, she was harassed for not giving birth to a male child.
Arguments
The counsel representing the husband and the other accused, advocate Azeem Salih, along with others, submitted that, even if the allegations provided in the FIR are accepted in their entirety, no offence under Section 498A of the IPC was made out against the petitioners.
According to him, except for some vague and omnibus allegations, no specific acts have been attributed to the petitioners, and even if the allegations against the petitioners are assumed to be true in their entirety, the alleged acts would not constitute “cruelty” within the meaning of Section 498A of the IPC.
The senior public prosecutor, Megha K Xavier, submitted that the allegations contained in the First Information Statement, as well as the statements of witnesses recorded during the course of investigation, disclose serious allegations against the petitioners.
Story continues below this ad
It was argued that the quashing of the criminal proceedings is wholly unwarranted. According to the counsel, the complainant has narrated specific instances of cruelty allegedly committed by the petitioners in the First Information Statement, and the essential ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC (cruelty) are made out.
Justice Jobin Sebastian found the allegations against the husband and other accused serious in nature.