High court fines Ludhiana woman ₹50K for filing plaint to ‘harass’ ex-husband
The Punjab and Haryana high court has opined that filing of complaint reflects “gross abuse” of the process of the law.
The Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) has fined a Ludhiana woman ₹50,000 for filing a “false” criminal complaint against her estranged husband despite an Uttarakhand court decreeing their divorce.
“…the impugned criminal complaint is nothing but aimed at harassing and wreaking vengeance upon the petitioner (estranged husband) by the respondent (woman) – the impugned criminal complaint would amount to sheer harassment of the petitioner and hence the same deserves to be quashed,” the bench of justice Sumeet Goel observed.
The Uttarakhand man and the Ludhiana woman had solemnised marriage in Ludhiana in 2003. They filed for a divorce which was decreed by an Uttarakhand court in 2014. In 2015, she filed an application before a family court that the mutual-consent divorce decree was obtained with a fraud, but her plea was dismissed. Later that year, she filed another application seeking quashing of the divorce decree which was also dismissed by an Uttarakhand court in November 2015. She had also challenged the divorce decree in the Uttarakhand high court but withdrew the same in July 2017.
In November 2016, she filed a criminal complaint before a Ludhiana court, accusing her estranged husband of cheating, rape and domestic violence. In June 2017, the court summoned the husband and his family members. It was against this order he approached the high court in 2017.
The court found that the trial court, before proceeding with the complaint, did not follow mandatory provisions of Section 202(1) of the CrPC since the accused were residing outside the jurisdiction of the court. As per this provision, if accused persons are outside the territorial jurisdiction of the court, before issuing summons an inquiry is to be carried out by the magistrate himself or by assigning it to someone whether allegations are made out or not. In the case in hand, no such inquiry was conducted and the husband and his family members were summoned by the Ludhiana court.
The HC also found that the woman in her plea invoked territorial jurisdiction of Ludhiana court, which it said “is not only bereft of any detail but are ex facie false.” It observed that the entire thrust of the complaint aims at the alleged fraud/cheating committed against her in obtaining divorce from the family court in Uttarakhand. “.. it is inexplicable as to how any offence was committed within the territorial jurisdiction of the Ludhiana court. The inevitable conclusion, thus, is that the complaint ought not to have been entertained at all on account of territorial jurisdiction,” the bench recorded.
The court opined that filing of complaint reflects “gross abuse” of the process of the law. “...a person who does not come to a court with clean hands is not only dis-entitled to be heard qua plea raised by such person but also such litigation should not be allowed to go without a punitive response. … It is high time to check, with firmness, any such endeavor laced with concealment/falsehood/ forum hunting,” it said adding that this principle applies, with more vigour to a litigant, who chooses criminal prosecution with a motive to seek personal vengeance, rather than seeking justice.
Directing that a copy of the order be sent to the Ludhiana deputy commissioner who shall have to recover the fine by lawful means, if not deposited by her voluntarily, the court quashed the summoning orders as well as the criminal complaint filed by the woman.