This is not a misconduct of the government employee, if she had lied before court then it is is the court which has to take further action in this regard.

In fact the defacto complainant's regular presence before court is not necessary until and unless if her witness deposition and cross examination is pending.

If the 498a case is pending for over 20 years without any progress you may approach the high court with a petition to quash the same especially considering your age and the difficulties you face due to the stretched legal battle.

As you have filed a petition before high court once again you may have to wait for its disposal or withdraw that and proceed with the pending case in the trial court.

If she has made any false statement on oath before court she can be tried for perjury and diciplinary action can also be taken against her by fiiing proceedings in her office 

You can report your daughter-in-law’s misconduct to her government department if you have evidence that she deliberately misled the court by making false claims about her official leave. Making false statements in a legal proceeding can amount to professional misconduct and may warrant departmental inquiry or disciplinary action under government service rules.

However, you must exercise caution:

• Any complaint should be factual, supported by documentation (such as RTI responses and court orders), and presented as a professional grievance—not as a means to harass or retaliate.

• If the court perceives your complaint as an attempt to pressure or “attack” the complainant, it could be interpreted as an act of cruelty or vindictiveness, which she may use against you in the 498A proceedings.

• It is more effective to present such evidence of false statements or delay tactics before the trial court and High Court to support your plea for an expeditious trial and to seek judicial directions against her abuse of process.

Your priority should be pursuing legal remedies for speedy trial and exposing delaying tactics in court, rather than seeking disciplinary action without a clear basis. If you take action, do so professionally and not as retaliation, to avoid any adverse inference in your ongoing case.

For further help in drafting applications or court submissions, you may engage us confidentially. All advice is based on the facts you’ve provided and seeks to protect your legal rights responsibly.

Concentrate on main case 

no need to seek disciplinary action against her 

- Only if she has filed an application for adjournment on false  grounds then you can reply the same along with the RTI , and also can file an application under section 340 CrPC for giving false information before the Court. 

- Further, as you are a senior citizen then you can file a complaint under the Senior Citizens Act against her for harassment and mental agony. 

- Further, your wife can also file a complaint under the provision of DV Act against her daughter-in-law for harassment . 

You can contact me, if further details information needed. 

Do not directly complain to her Government department right now. Instead, highlight her false claims before the court and ask for costs or adverse observations. Once the court notes her conduct, then you can forward that to her department if you still wish.

This way you avoid any risk of her portraying your action as harassment, and you also strengthen your position before the High Court when you press for early disposal.

• Yes, you can technically file a complaint with her Govt. department alleging misuse of her employee status/false statement. But in practice, departments rarely act unless the court itself records an adverse finding.

• If you independently complain, it may be seen as harassment and could backfire in the 498A trial, as her side may allege you are pressurizing her.

• Best course: Focus on your High Court petition for expeditious disposal. Request the HC to record that she is filing frivolous petitions and misleading adjournment pleas. A court observation will carry far more weight than a departmental complaint.

Recommendation: Avoid departmental complaint for now; instead, press HC for strict directions against adjournments. This is safer and faster to end the case.

1. You shall have to find out whether her such act of attempting to mislead the Court falls under misconduct as per the service conduct rule of her office keeping in mind that her such attempt has failed and it has not caused any affect on you.

2. However, you can lodge a complaint to her Office as a Senior Citizen and your said complaint is not supposed to have any negative affect on you.

1. Can you seek disciplinary action against your daughter-in-law as a Government employee for filing false/ misleading petitions in court?

• Technically, yes. Any Government servant is bound by the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules or equivalent service conduct rules of her department.

• Making false statements or misusing her position in judicial proceedings may amount to “misconduct.”

• A complaint can be made to her Departmental Vigilance/Disciplinary Authority enclosing the court order, her adjournment petition, and proof (via RTI) that she did in fact take leave contrary to her statement.

However, in practice:

• Courts are the right forum to deal with false statements in proceedings. You can move the trial court itself for action under Section 340 CrPC (perjury/false statement), or bring this fact to the High Court’s notice in your pending petition for expeditious trial.

• Departmental authorities may be reluctant to interfere unless the court itself records a finding that she misled it.

2. Can this backfire and be shown as “cruelty” against you in the 498A case?

• No, filing a legitimate complaint or application to stop harassment is not cruelty.

• But — if your complaint looks more like personal retaliation rather than a bona fide effort, it could give her room to claim that you are harassing her.

• At this stage (20 years into trial, with High Court orders already in your favor), your stronger position is to focus on getting the trial concluded quickly, not to open side battles.

3. Best Practical Strategy for You

• Press in High Court: In your pending HC petition, highlight that despite its earlier order, the complainant is adopting delaying tactics and even misled the trial court with a false adjournment plea.

• Section 340 CrPC: Move the trial court or HC to initiate action for false statements, if you want to formally record this. Courts take a stricter view than departments.

• Departmental complaint: You may file it, but it is secondary and may drag on without benefit to your main case.

• Keep focus: At your age, and with the High Court already sympathetic, the most effective path is to insist on strict compliance with the HC’s “time-bound trial” order.

- Yes, if the said case is not based on truth facts and having no merit , then the petition can be quashed by the HC 

- However. file the quash petition only after the framing of charge by the trial court. 

Yes, You can go for quashing of FIR. For details you can book the consultation online.
Thanks and Regards 
Adv Aman Verma

Legal Corridor

Yes, you can try quashing. Since charges are already framed and the complainant is repeatedly delaying evidence, you may file a fresh petition under Section 482 CrPC before the High Court.

The HC can be requested to:

• Quash the case outright (if it finds it is a clear abuse of process), or

• At minimum, give strict directions to the trial court to finish the evidence within a fixed time, without entertaining adjournments.

Filing departmental complaints or side actions may weaken your main defence. Focus all your effort on the High Court for quashing/early disposal — this is the safest and most effective route.

After charge framing, quashing a 498A case in the High Court is legally possible but only on new or compelling grounds, such as "abuse of process," false or frivolous conduct by the complainant, or inordinate delay that amounts to denial of justice. Courts have recognized that mental harassment, deliberate delay tactics, or clear abuse of process by the complainant—if properly documented and argued—can justify quashing. However, the Supreme Court has clarified that a second quashing petition on grounds that were already available when the first petition was filed is generally not maintainable unless there is evidence of a new, substantial change in circumstances.

Therefore, you may approach the High Court again for quashing, but it is essential to base your petition on recent events—like deliberate falsehood or persistent delay tactics—and provide strong evidence such as RTI responses, court orders, and patterns of adjournment requests. Emphasize your advanced age, the prolonged pendency (20 years), and misuse of court process. Your petition should clearly demonstrate that continued trial is causing undue hardship, and that the prosecution amounts to an abuse of the legal process.

File all supporting documents, highlight the recent HC order for expeditious trial being willfully circumvented, and seek judicial relief accordingly. The focus should remain on denial of a fair, speedy trial—not on counter-accusations—so as to avoid any adverse inference in the main case.

There are Supreme Court and High Court judgments which have categorically recognized that in some cases, wives have filed complaints under Section 498A IPC to take vengeance or settle scores against the in-laws, leading to the misuse of the law. Courts have noted that when allegations are exaggerated or not supported by credible evidence, such cases can result in severe harassment of the husband’s family and have even imposed costs on complainants for false or malicious litigation.

The judiciary has cautioned against indiscriminate or motivated prosecutions under Section 498A and has provided that, where proven, courts can quash such proceedings and award costs to protect innocent relatives from unnecessary hardship

HC will not quash the case as charge sheet already filed and trial has started 

quashing is to be done only in exceptional circumstances 

You can file a quash petition in the High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to quash a 498A case, even if it is under trial. (Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) has been replaced by Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). This section allows the High Court to intervene to secure the ends of justice and prevent the misuse of court processes. 

The High Court can consider such a petition at any stage of the proceedings, provided there are grounds such as the allegations being vague, malicious, the case lacking merit.

If the allegations in the First Information Report (FIR) are vague and do not constitute an offense under Section 498A, the High Court may quash the proceedings

A quashing petition can be filed if the proceedings are an abuse of the process of law. 

You must present strong evidence to the High Court demonstrating that the case is false, malicious, or without merit

1. If the case has been unreasonably delayed, then you can file an application before the HC praying for quashing the FIR since its direction upon the lower Court  to expedite the matter has yielded no result.

2. The HC might further direct the lower Court to expedite the matter without allowing any further adjournment.

If Hc had rejected quashing then you can’t again file. You can approach supreme court

1. False statement is made in the Court proceedings not in discharge of official duties. Department has no power to punish her.
2. You can approach the Court and disclose her conduct, you can also approach with proof of her conduct.
3. Seek quash of charge sheet in High Court on the ground that the  complainant is not interested in proceeding with trial and there is no merit in her complaint .
4. Being a senior citizen, you have every right to seek conclusion of trial in time bound manner.
5. Filing any complaint against making false statement will reflect you negatively. But you can make capital out of her conduct.

court does not act as investigating agency 

you should cross examine her during trial on false statements made by her in complaint 

No court can’t interfere as the said facts were not before it. But court can secure the ornaments in that locker and ensure that same are safe 

The court proceedings are likely to get delayed by such necessary or unnecessary petitions, if you want the petitions to be disposed soon, then you don't object to the petitions strongly and may ask the court to allow the same instead of vehemently opposing each time whenever she files a petition.

If the locker is jointly operated you can inform the court about it and express your willingness to jointly open it and hand over her jewels, what is the problem for you to return her jewels, becasue in any case they are considered as stridhan to which she is the only person to claim absolute title, therefore your objections will lead to unnecessary delay. 

Think it wisely and move on accordinlgy

The trial court cannot act as an investigating agency or entertain new issues outside the FIR and charge sheet. Since the locker matter is not part of the charges, the court has rightly rejected her petitions.

• You should object on record that such applications are beyond the scope of trial.

• Request the court to record that repeated petitions are frivolous and delaying tactics.

• Best approach: press the High Court (in your pending petition) for strict directions to the trial court to complete evidence within a fixed timeline and not waste time on irrelevant petitions.

1. If she has filed an application/statement with false claim before the lower Court then it is the said Court which will hear the matter and decide on the issue.

2. You shall have to point it out to the lower Court that she has been filing frivolous applications for delaying the matter for which the Court will impose penalty on the Applicant.

3. If you are aggrieved with any Order/direction of the lower Court or for its taking long time for deciding on the matter, then you can approach the High Court.

- You can submit the proof of the same before the Court and cross examine her in her evidence.