MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court has quashed a criminal case and proceedings against a woman’s in-laws, observing that failure to react, or refusing to actively take sides with the daughter-in-law or being a passive bystander, cannot be a basis for invoking the law for the offense of ‘cruelty to wife’.“A parent or relative, caught in the crossfire of accusations made by and between two adults in a marital relationship, and who chooses to remain silent, cannot be charged with an offense under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code,” Justice RR Bhonsale said in a May 8 ruling.The crime of cruelty towards one’s wife is punishable by up to three years in prison. Cruelty has to be an intentional act intended to lead a woman to commit suicide or inflict serious injury to life, limb or health, as provided for in Section 498A of the IPC and no other, the HC observed. As the Supreme Court said, while addressing matrimonial disputes, “pragmatic realities” must be kept in mind, the HC noted.In July 2022, police registered an FIR invoking Section 498A of the IPC after a 26-year-old woman, within six months of marriage, lodged a complaint against her 31-year-old husband, her parents, brother and sister. The FIR alleged mistreatment, abuse and assault by her husband and in-laws, she was not allowed her phone due to concerns raised by her husband, she was not allowed to visit her parents, she was made to do all the household chores, she was forced to watch adult content by her husband and her in-laws kept all her gold ornaments when she decided to leave the matrimonial home.Her husband and in-laws requested the HC to quash the FIR. Her lawyer, as instructed, did not press for any relief for the husband, but only for the in-laws, arguing that the case against them was vague. The wife’s lawyer said it was the husband’s second marriage and, in 2021, a similar cruelty case filed by his first wife was dropped only after an engagement.The HC, hearing all the lawyers, including those for the wife and the state, said the allegations against the in-laws were “simple and sweeping allegations which are not supported by credible material and cannot be the basis for invoking the provisions of Section 498A of the IPC”.Against the in-laws, “what is alleged is some disagreement or a difference in a point of view in the normal course of family life,” Justice Bhonsale held, while quashing the FIR against four as a “sheer abuse and misuse” of the legal process to implicate the husband’s relatives in “vague and general allegations”.The HC ordered the criminal case against the husband to continue.The ruling cites various TS rulings on the law. One of the TS rulings had noted: “It must be taken into account that in the context of marital disputes, emotions run high and, therefore, in complaints filed for harassment or domestic violence, there may be a tendency to involve other family members who do not come to the rescue of the complainant or remain silent spectators to any alleged incident of harassment, which... cannot by itself constitute a criminal act without specific acts being attributed to it. Furthermore, when tempers become heated and relationships turn sour, there is also a propensity to exaggerate accusations, which does not necessarily mean that such domestic disputes should be given the color of criminality.”WHAT THE HC SAID: There is a need to be extremely cautious, tread carefully and consider the ground realities that prima facie emerge. As the Supreme Court observed, accusations are often made against close and distant relatives, who live in different cities, sometimes abroad, and who visit or meet with the parties on rare occasions, at weddings or social or festive gatherings. Such cases have different intentions, motives and objectives. In some cases, for various reasons, allegations under section 498A of the IPC are made immediately or soon after marriage and initiation of criminal proceedings. These cases require greater scrutiny and should be handled with greater care and caution. Family members are generally charged based on broad, vague, general accusations, without any details regarding specific instances of their involvement in the alleged crime.
