Greed and lust even separates siblings: Jharkhand High Court refuses to quash widow’s case against inlaws over property

Background

• According to the complaint, the accused persons had earlier lodged a police case accusing the widow of abetting her husband’s suicide, following which she was taken into judicial custody and later released on bail.
• The widow alleged that after her release, she was not allowed to enter her matrimonial home and was forced to live in a room at her paternal uncle’s house.
• She further claimed that the accused persons trespassed into that room, vandalised her belongings, stole cash and jewellery, and threatened her to deter her from claiming her share in her deceased husband’s property, which she asserted was joint family property.

Findings

• In this case it is the complainant who is a young widow and claiming her share of joint property from the petitioners and there is admitted acrimony between them.
• It is the case of the petitioners that the complainant has abetted the suicide of her husband, of course, it is the defence of the complainant that it is the petitioners who pressurised the husband of complainant to ensure the fulfilment of demand of dowry of motorcycle to be brought by complainant from her parents.
• According to the petitioners this forced the husband of the complainant to tell the complainant to go to her parents’ house as he has brought her to her matrimonial house without fulfilment of the dowry of motorcycle and that led to his committing suicide.
• The materials on record are not sufficient to conclude that the complainant is using the judicial forum for oblique purposes and for wrecking vengeance, which is the only ground urged upon by the petitioners, to quash the entire criminal proceeding at nascent stage, when only the summoning order has been passed.
• This is not a fit case, where the prayers of the petitioners are to be acceded to in exercise of the power under Section 482 of CrPC.