The Supreme Court has expressed concern over the trend of in-laws being dragged into criminal cases to settle scores in marital disputes, often using children to vilify each other. This concern was raised as the court quashed a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) case against a paternal aunt, whose brother and his wife are locked in a bitter matrimonial dispute.
A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran criticized the Bombay High Court’s decision to refuse to quash the case without examining the material on record. The court observed that it is commonplace for in-laws to be dragged into cases arising out of marital discord, and children are often used to vilify each other.
The case in question involved a divorced mother who alleged that her son was being sexually molested by his paternal aunt. However, the court noted that the FIR was filed as a counterblast to an FIR lodged by the divorced father, who made an equally shocking allegation against the maternal uncle. The court perused the divorce decree dated September 2023, passed by mutual consent, and observed that the children are under the custody of the father with visitation rights to the mother’s home.
The court noted that the mother alleged that the complaint of sexual harassment was raised by her son even while she was in the matrimonial home, but no such allegation was raised at the time of divorce or before the FIR was filed on March 17, 2024. The court observed that the FIR does not inspire confidence and appears to be a retaliatory counterblast born out of an embittered custody battle rather than a bona fide disclosure of child sexual abuse.
Advocate Sana Raees Khan, appearing for the appellant, argued that the prosecution was a classic abuse of the criminal justice process, initiated solely to settle personal scores in a bitter custody battle. The top court agreed and quashed the FIR against the paternal aunt, registered at the Khadki Police Station in Pune district under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012.
The court ordered that there shall be no further proceedings taken in pursuance of the FIR.
