“18. The above-mentioned decisions dearly demonstratethatthiscourt has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse of section 498A IPC and the increased tendency of implicatingrelativesof the husband in matrimonial disputes, v/ithout analysing the long term ramifications of a trial on the complainant as wellastheaccused. It is further manifest from the said judgments that false implication by way of general omnibus allegations made in the course of matrimonial dispute, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law. Therefore, this court by way of its judgments has warned the courts from proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of thehusbandwhenno prime facie case is made out against them. 22. Therefore, upon consideration of the relevant circumstancesandin the absence of any specific role attributed to the accused appellants, it would be unjust if the Appellants are forced to go through the tribulations of a trial, i.e., general and omnibus allegations cannotmanifest in a situation where the relatives of the complainant'shusbandareforcedto undergo trial. It has been highlighted by this court in varied instances, that a criminal trial leading to an eventual acquittalalsoinflictssevere scars upon the accused, and such an exercise must therefore be discouraged. ’’
