Prayagraj. The Allahabad High Court has dismissed dowry allegations against a man, saying the allegations are baseless and motivated by personal disputes. The court said in this case that in a morally civilized society, where will a man go if he does not express his sexual desire to his wife. Justice Anish Kumar Gupta, while dismissing the case against Pranjal Sharma and two others, said the evidence presented in the FIR and statements of witnesses do not support the claims of dowry harassment. The court found that the primary allegations centered around the couple’s sexual disagreements and were not related to dowry demands.
The court said, “It is clear that the dispute between the parties is regarding non-establishment of sexual relationship due to which the FIR has been lodged by the opposite party and false and fabricated allegations have been made regarding demand of dowry.” The court questioned, “Where will a man go in a morally civilized society if he does not express his sexual desire to his wife or the wife does not express her sexual desire to her husband?” In the FIR, Pranjal Shukla has been accused of demanding dowry and abusing his wife, along with forcing her to watch obscene films and have unnatural sex. The court said that these allegations were not proved by credible evidence.
According to the facts of this case, Misha Shukla was married to the applicant Pranjal Shukla as per Hindu customs on December 7, 2015. Misha accused her in-laws Madhu Sharma and Punya Sheel Sharma of demanding dowry. However, it was also clarified in the FIR that there was no demand for dowry before the marriage. It was also told in the FIR that Pranjal used to drink alcohol and watch obscene films. Also, he insists on having unnatural sex with his wife and does not pay attention to her when she refuses. Later he left his wife and went to Singapore.
Senior advocate Vinay Sharan, counsel for the petitioner, said that the allegations made in the FIR and the statements of the opposition are related to physical relations and the allegations made by the opposition (wife) in the statement regarding assault are related to not fulfilling the sexual desires of the petitioner. I am here not to demand dowry. The court said, “It is clear from the preliminary examination and the statement of the victim that if any assault was committed, it was not for the demand of dowry, but for refusing to fulfill her sexual desires.” The court, in its order dated October 3, quashed the case against Shukla. The court said, “In our view, the present FIR is nothing but a fabricated story regarding demand for dowry.
