S. 498A IPC | In-Laws Can't Be Booked Merely On Allegations That They Supported Husband Who Subjected Wife To Cruelty: Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court recently held that merely because the complaint states that the in-laws supported the husband in subjecting her to cruelty would not mean that they have committed the offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC.

A division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande quashed a case of cruelty against four members of a family, all in-laws of a woman, who had lodged a section 498A complaint against them including her husband, in March 2014.

"Merely, remarks in the complaint about supporting the husband while narrating some of the incidents would not per se amount to committing the offences which they have been alleged of. It would be unfair to continue the prosecution against the present Applicants for the conduct of the complainant's husband, in which they have been unfortunately dragged," the bench said in its July 25 order.

Background

In her complaint, the woman alleged that she married her husband in October 2000 and gave birth to her first daughter in 2001 and her second daughter was born in 2006. It was her allegation that after the first daughter's birth, she learnt about her husband's extra-marital affair and when she confronted him about the same, he physically assaulted her.

She claimed that before the birth of the second daughter, she suffered two forced miscarriages - one because of physical assault and one due to forcible sexual intercourse during pregnancy.

As against her in-laws, she claimed that her mother and father-in-law, sister-in-law were aware of the 'cruelty' that her husband subjected her to, but never advised against the same. In fact, it was alleged that the in-laws always told her not to disclose the ill-treatment meted out to her.

The woman further alleged that her husband had multiple affairs with other women yet he forced her to have a physical relationship with him.

She stated that in August 2013, when her husband forced her to have physical relations with him, she had refused, leading to an altercation between them and the husband then brought out the holy Quran and uttered 'Talaq' thrice, thereby divorcing using the now struck-down 'Triple Talaq'.

However, it was argued that her in-laws forced her not to speak about this incident to anyone and even compelled her to have a physical relationship with her husband to nullify the 'Triple Talaq.'

On the other hand, the in-laws informed the bench that when they learnt of the extra-marital affair of their son (complainant's husband), they disapproved of it and even threw him out of the house.

The in-laws maintained that during this period, the woman and her daughters lived with them and they took proper care of them. They told the bench that they had 'cordial' relations with the complainant and in fact, when she lost her family in a building collapse incident, they supported her.

Verdict

In their order, the judges noted that even in the chargesheet, there was no statement of any witness incriminating the in-laws in any cruelty incident. They noted that the in-laws did not restrain the woman from taking away her gold belongings when she left the matrimonial house and even did not agree with her husband, who insisted the wife to move to her parental house, leaving behind their third child, a toddler, back with him. Further, the judges noted that the complainant even visited the in-laws house during birthday parties and special occasions. 

"Hence, from the statements of the relatives of the complainant, it is obvious that there are no serious allegations as such against the present Applicants. These are merely omnibus allegations which are not supported by any evidence, as regards the ill-treatment and cruelty meted to her. The allegations in the complaint are general and vague without specific examples of cruelty and harassment. The record and the statements do not support the allegations made against the present Applicants. The complaint against the present Applicants is not supported by any documents, letter, e-mails, message to support the allegation of cruelty and harassment," the bench said.

The bench noted the 'trend' to rope in even the relatives of the husband in such cases.

"It seems that along with the husband, being his family members, the present Applicants have been dragged into litigation. Presently there is a rising tendency by the litigants to drag the in-laws and near relatives in the offence registered under Section 498-A. This is also one of the example of its kind," the bench emphasised.

The bench opined that the allegations in the First Information Report (FIR) or the complaint taken to its face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offence alleged.

"The malafide proceedings initiated against the present Applicants needs to be curbed at this stage itself, in order to prevent abuse or process of law and miscarriage of justice, since it is obvious that the allegations are not supported by any other cogent material and have been made with a view to wreak vengeance against the present Applicants," the bench said while quashing the proceedings.

Appearance:

Advocates Misbah Solkar,  Sejal Jain, Mohd. Taha appeared for the Applicant.

Assistant Public Prosecutor DJ Haldankar represented the State.

Advocates Shailendra Agharkar and Rizwan Merchant appeared for the Complainant.

Case Details: Samad Habib Mithani vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Application 1241 of 2014)

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment