The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a dowry harassment FIR against a husband and his parents, observing that there cannot be a blanket rule to dismiss complaints against in-laws in matrimonial disputes. The court directed the police to investigate the allegations while examining the nine-year delay in filing the complaint.The court pointed out the nine-year gap in the complaint, considering the fact that the couple got married in 2016, but the wife came forward with allegations this year. Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde made the observations while dealing with a plea by a husband and his family members seeking to quash an FIR in a dowry harassment case.“It is indeed true that the cases against the family members of the husband are on the rise, where the dispute between the husband and wife is given the colour of a criminal case. However, there cannot be a straightjacket formula to quash the complaint filed by the wife against the family members in case of dispute between husband and wife,” the October 15 order said.The court added that each case has to be considered and evaluated based on the contents of the complaint.Wife alleged dowry harassment, assaultThe couple married in April 2016. Appearing for the petitioner-husband, advocate Suyog Herele E submitted that the wife left the matrimonial home in December 2016. The husband later filed a petition seeking dissolution of marriage, which is still pending before the court. Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde observed that the complaint contained serious allegations against the husband as well as his parents.In 2026, the wife lodged a complaint against her husband and his parents, alleging dowry demands, physical and mental harassment, verbal abuse, assault and criminal intimidation. She alleged that despite her family meeting the dowry demand, her husband and in-laws continued to harass her and eventually forced her to leave the matrimonial home.Also Read | Calling wife mentally ill, absent-minded with no proof is cruelty: Karnataka High CourtAppearing for the wife, advocate Nagharish G S argued that the wife was threatened with harm if she approached the police, explaining the delay in filing the complaint.Story continues below this adBased on her complaint, the police registered an FIR under the relevant provisions of the IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The husband and his parents approached the high court seeking to quash the FIR, arguing that the complaint was filed after a delay of nine years and contained vague allegations against the parents.Delay raises questions: OrderThe court noted that there was a delay of nine years in lodging the complaint. However, it pointed out that the wife had raised allegations of dowry demands, verbal abuse, and physical assault in her statement of objections filed in the husband’s divorce proceedings in 2020.The court observed that the complaint contained serious allegations against the husband as well as his parents, including allegations of dowry harassment and physical and mental cruelty.Referring to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt Ltd v State of Maharashtra, the court said, “At the stage of considering whether to quash an FIR, it was not required to examine the merits or truthfulness of the allegations.” It said the court must only consider whether the allegations, if taken to be true, constitute an offence and whether the matter requires investigation to establish their veracity.Story continues below this adAlso Read | Calling wife mentally ill, absent-minded with no proof is cruelty: Karnataka High CourtThe court held that the allegations warranted investigation and dismissed the petition seeking to quash the FIR. However, it directed the police to examine whether there was justification for making allegations against the husband’s parents, particularly in view of the nine-year delay in filing the complaint.