E-Paper
No arrest during ‘cooling-period’, says Allahabad HC for FIR under sec 498A
In a bid to prevent misuse of section 498A (punishment for cruelty by husband and his relatives) of IPC, the Allahabad high court has said that after the registration of a FIR, no arrest should be made before expiry of a “cooling-period” of two months.
In a bid to prevent misuse of section 498A (punishment for cruelty by husband and his relatives) of Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Allahabad high court has said that after the registration of a first information report (FIR), no arrest should be made before expiry of a “cooling-period” of two months.
During the “cooling-period”, the matter should be immediately referred to a family welfare committee (FWC) for an attempt to resolve the matrimonial dispute through mediation, it added.
“No arrest or police action to nab the named accused persons shall be made after lodging of the FIR or complaints without concluding the ‘cooling-period’ which is two months from the lodging of the FIR or the complaint. During this ‘cooling-period’, the matter would be immediately referred to family welfare committee in each district,” Justice Rahul Chaturvedi said in his order on Monday. HT has seen a copy of the order.
The court also made it clear that only those matrimonial disputes would be sent to the FWC that pertains to Section 498A (cruelty by husband and his relative) and other sections of IPC in which the imprisonment, if found guilty, is less than 10 years, but there is no physical injury caused to the woman.
Justice Chaturvedi made these observations while hearing a petition filed by Mukesh Bansal (father-in-law), Manju Bansal (mother-in-law) and Sahib Bansal (husband) that challenged the dismissal of their discharge application by a lower court.
Bansal’s wife had lodged an FIR against him for alleged sexual assault, and her in-laws for reportedly subjecting her to cruelty. The accused had filed a discharge application in the lower court which was dismissed by the court.
While the high court allowed the discharge plea of the woman’s in-laws, it rejected the husband’s petition and directed him to appear for trial before the lower court.
Justice Chaturvedi was of the view that “the tradition fragrance of our age-old institution of marriage would completely evaporate over a period of time if gross and unmindful misuse of section 498-A of IPC would keep on happening rampantly.”
’Avoid graphic details of sexual assault in FIRs’
Justice Chaturvedi also said that the practice of graphical descriptions while lodging police complaints over allegations of sexual assault and demand for dowry in marital disputes is not desirable.
“FIR is not soft porn literature where graphical description should be made,” he said.
