“ Having heard the learned Counsel on both sides, we have perused the impugned order and other material placed on record. The Quash Petition was filed before the High Court by the A-5 to A-7. So far as A-5 is concerned, as she died during the pendency of the proceedings, cause did not survive. So far as A-7, who is the wife of A- 6, is concerned, the High Court has observed that there are no specific overt acts against her and she has been residing in a different address and at no point of time she had been in a joint family wherein the de facto complainant lived during the period the alleged demand of dowry is said to have been made. On the aforesaid ground, the High Court has quashed the proceedings so far as A-7 is concerned. So far as Appellant-A-6 is concerned, the petition is dismissed by the High Court observing that there are some averments, against the Appellant. It is not in dispute that the Appellant-A-6, who is the husband of A-7, was residing at a different address during the time alleged demand was made. Further, we have perused the complaint filed by the 2nd Respondent. Mainly the specific allegations are only against the husband and immediate family members. So far as the Appellant who is A-1's paternal uncle's son, a bald allegation is made that he along with his mother and wife were abusing the complainant. In absence of any specific allegations against him, we are of the view that the Appellant also stands on same the footing of A-7 against whom proceedings are quashed. As the Appellant was not even residing in the address of the complainant and his family members who are A-1 to A-4 and in absence of specific allegations and overt acts, we are of the view that if the proceedings are allowed to go on against the Appellant, it amounts to abuse of process. Applying the ratio laid down in the judgment of this Court in the case of State of Haryana and Ors. v. Bhajan Lal and Ors. MANU/SC/0115/1992 : 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335, we are of the view that it is a clear case which falls within one of the categories of the aforesaid case where power can be exercised Under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings.”
