Ishwar Chand Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh

Supreme Court of India, 29 May 2026, 2 judges, 2026 INSC 587

The Court quashed a POCSO and BNS complaint by an estranged wife against her husband and his family, holding that bare, unsupported allegations made amid long matrimonial litigation, with apparently tutored statements, were an abuse of process.

Facts

The first appellant and the complainant married in 2008 and had a daughter in 2009. The complainant left the matrimonial home in 2011, and the children stayed with the appellants (the husband, his mother, and the complainant's sister-in-law and brother-in-law). The parties then filed more than ten criminal and civil cases against each other. In September 2024, some months after the daughter came to live with her, the complainant filed a complaint before the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Meerut alleging sexual offences against the daughter by the husband and the brother-in-law, and assault and threats by the two women, under Sections 65, 74, 115, 351(2) and 352 BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. Cognizance was taken and summons issued. The Allahabad High Court refused to quash the proceedings under Section 528 BNSS, and the appellants appealed.

Questions before the Court

Whether the complaint and the statements recorded under Sections 223 and 225 BNSS disclosed a prima facie case of the offences alleged against the appellants.
Whether continuing the prosecution, arising out of long matrimonial litigation between the parties, was an abuse of the process of law that should be quashed.

What the Court held

To invoke rape under Section 65 BNS or Section 4 of the POCSO Act, the material must prima facie show specific acts within the categories in Section 63 BNS or Section 3 POCSO. A blanket allegation, with no date, details or supporting material, cannot set criminal prosecution in motion.
Courts must be especially careful before taking cognizance of rape allegations where the parties are already embroiled in matrimonial litigation, since the scope for fabrication and vexatious litigation is high.
The complaint and the statements of the complainant and the minor were virtually identical, indicating tutoring. The allegations of hurt, criminal intimidation and insult under Sections 115, 351 and 352 BNS were vague and unsupported, and the absence of any medical examination was fatal.
Applying categories 3, 5 and 7 of Bhajan Lal, the complaint, cognizance order and summoning order were quashed. The observations are confined to these facts and do not apply to genuine cases.

Why it matters

The judgment applies the Bhajan Lal categories to quash a POCSO complaint arising from a matrimonial dispute. It records concern at the use of false POCSO and other criminal complaints, often naming the whole family, as a weapon in matrimonial and other disputes, says courts must scrutinise such allegations for a prima facie case, and calls on advocates to advise clients against frivolous complaints. It also stresses that genuine cases of sexual abuse of children must be dealt with swiftly and firmly.

In the Court's words

Copied from the official judgment; each passage links to its page.

“Therefore, by merely stating that the prosecutrix was raped by appellant Nos.1 and 4, the Courts cannot set into motion the wheels of criminal prosecution. The Courts have to be extremely careful before taking cognizance of complaints made while invoking the provisions of rape, especially in cases where parties have already been heavily embroiled in matrimonial litigation, since the scope of manipulation, fabrication and vexatious litigation is exponentially high due to pre-existing bad blood between the parties who are often emotionally charged against one another and allegations of rape becomes an aid towards arm twisting tactics.”

B.V. NagarathnaPage 23 of the judgment

“There has been no alteration, addition or subtraction from either of the three statements making each of them virtually identical to one another. This is not a case of there being consistency in all the statements but a case of verbatim reproduction of statements almost parrot-like, as a result of tutoring by the complainant and possibly her family.”

B.V. NagarathnaPage 27 of the judgment

“We say so for the reason that if a person is made an accused and forced to face a criminal trial on general and sweeping allegations without bringing on record any specific instances of criminal conduct, it would tantamount to an abuse of the process of law and court. Hence, legal practitioners who tender advice in such cases must restrain parties from filing such false/frivolous complaints when requested to do so.”

B.V. NagarathnaPage 44 of the judgment

“At this juncture we hasten to observe that the observations made during the course of this judgment by this Court are strictly confined to the facts and circumstances of the present case and in no way should they be construed to apply generally to other cases wherein similar allegations may have been made against accused persons genuinely.”

B.V. NagarathnaPage 38 of the judgment

Provisions interpreted

Case and bench

Parties: Ishwar Chand Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Case: Criminal Appeal No. ___ of 2026 (arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 18035 of 2025)
Decided: 29 May 2026
Bench: B.V. Nagarathna, Ujjal Bhuyan
Opinions: Judgment of the Court delivered by B.V. Nagarathna, J. No separate opinion.

Read cases in order with a study path