The Supreme Court on Monday said that in matrimonial disputes, relatives of the husband cannot be fastened with criminal liability if they fail to intervene or ask the wife to adjust in the matrimonial relationship without there being any evidence to show their active complicity in the crime.Supreme Court: In marital disputes, husband’s family not liable until proven complicitDeciding a case from Guna in Madhya Pradesh, a bench of justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh set aside proceedings under dowry harassment and domestic violence against four members of a family who were dragged in criminal cases by the wife for supporting the husband’s actions in abusing and demanding dowry from her.The bench said, “While safeguarding the rights and dignity of victims of domestic violence remains of paramount importance, courts are simultaneously required to ensure that the rigours of criminal law are not indiscriminately extended to every member of the family without a clear factual foundation.”The court was deciding a petition filed by the mother-in-law, sister-in-law, brother-in-law and his wife who appealed against the decision by Madhya Pradesh high court’s Gwalior bench in November 2024 which sustained the charges.Laying down the norms for deciding such cases, the top court said, “In prosecutions arising out of matrimonial disputes, the allegations against each accused must be specific, distinct and supported by prima facie material indicating active involvement in the alleged acts of cruelty, harassment or unlawful demand of dowry.”Further, the judgment said, “Mere allegations that family members supported the husband, failed to intervene, or advised the complainant to adjust in the matrimonial relationship, without anything further, would not ipso facto attract criminal liability.”In the present case, the court said that the entire allegations of dowry harassment was directed against the husband with no specific allegation against other members of the family. The bench said, “Criminal law cannot be permitted to become an instrument for venting personal grievances or settling familial scores in the absence of clear, specific and legally sustainable allegations,” advising the trial courts to exercise a “heightened degree of caution” and judicial scrutiny before permitting criminal prosecution against relatives who are sought to be implicated merely by virtue of their relationship with the spouse.The court simultaneously clarified that its observations should not be construed to mean that relatives of the husband can never be prosecuted under the relevant penal provisions. Explaining the basis for its decision, justice Singh, writing the judgment for the bench, said, “There may be situations where certain relatives remain passive spectators or fail to come to the aid of the complainant; however, such conduct, though morally questionable, cannot automatically be elevated to the status of criminal culpability.”The judgment urged the trial courts to go by the material on record and if the same discloses specific overt acts, active participation, or direct involvement in perpetrating cruelty, harassment or domestic violence, such relatives would undoubtedly be liable to face prosecution.“What the court is required to carefully examine is whether the allegations are genuine, specific and supported by foundational facts, or whether they are merely a consequence of matrimonial acrimony resulting in sweeping and omnibus implication of all family members,” the top court said while concluding “neither the FIR nor the DV complaint nor even the subsequent pleadings before the Family Court disclose any specific overt act individually attributable to the present appellants.”The judgment left it open for the trial court to summon the appellants, if during the course of trial, evidence emerges for proceeding against them for any of the alleged offences.The marriage in the present case took place in 2019 while the FIR by the wife was first filed in 2023.