Supreme Court Quashes FIR in Matrimonial Dispute Citing Vexatious Intent

The Supreme Court in case of Suman Mishra & Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., allowed the appeal thereby quashing the FIR No. 733 of 2021 and the charge-sheet dated February 2, 2022. The appeal was preferred aggrieved by the order of Allahabad High Court that had dismissed the appellant's petition for quashing criminal proceedings instituted under Sections 498A, 504, and 506 of the IPC, and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

Background: Rishal Kumar (Appellant No. 3) and Priyanka Mishra (Respondent No. 2) got married in the year 2016. In June 2021, Rishal Kumar approached the court for divorce, and roughly two months thereafter, Priyanka Mishra registered the FIR against him and his family members, including a preliminary charge of rape against the brother-in-law. The rape charge, however, was not included in the subsequent charge-sheet, and no protest petition was ever presented by the complainant.

The Supreme Court observed that the High Court's analysis of the FIR was cursory and lacked specific reasons. A key observation was the timing of the FIR, which was filed after the divorce petition, suggesting it might be a "counter blast". The Court also noted that the remaining allegations, after the dropping of the rape charge, appeared to be "general and omnibus".

Relying on precedents like Iqbal alias Bala and others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others (Click to Download), Monica Kumar and another VS State of Uttar Pradesh and others (Click to Download) , and Mala Kar and Another vs State of Uttarakhand (Click to Download), the Apex Court emphasized that when an accused seeks to quash an FIR under Section 482 CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution on the grounds that the proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with an ulterior motive, the Court has a duty to look into the FIR with care and a little more closely.

The Apex Court further observed that the Court owes the duty to carefully examine the FIRs in cases alleging vexatious proceedings. The Court found the Mala Kar case, where proceedings were quashed after divorce and remarriage, particularly relevant, as a decree of divorce had been passed and Rishal Kumar had remarried.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court concluded that the FIR seemed "vexatious" and motivated by an "ulterior motive" due to the filing of the divorce petition, warranting the quashing of the proceedings to prevent an abuse of the process of law.

Coram: Justice B. V. Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
Between: Suman Mishra vs State of Uttar Pradesh 2025 INSC 203
Date of Judgment: 12-02-2025