Day-To-Day Bickering Between Husband & Wife Not ‘Cruelty’ Under Section 498A IPC: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court’s Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri has recently held that cruelty contemplated u/s 498A would be different from general matrimonial disturbances faced by a couple, and that general allegations could not be made to establish a crime u/s 498A.

In upholding the appellant’s conviction u/s 323 IPC for voluntarily causing hurt to his wife, while discharging him u/s 498A IPC, a single-bench of Justice Sugato Majumder held:

Cruelty contemplated in Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is different from day to day bickering between the husband and wife. Sweeping and general allegations cannot be relied upon to conclude that offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code has been perpetrated. The Trial Court committed error in coming to conclusion that the Appellant is guilty of offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, conviction under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is liable to be quashed. However, conviction and sentence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code stands upheld, in view of oral and corroborating documentary evidence.

It was argued by the appellant that he was convicted under Sections 498A and 323 IPC as a result of his wife complaining that she was being tortured over demands for dowry, and that the appellant and his mother had attempted to murder her.

It was submitted that the Trial Court had failed to appreciate that no material evidence had been relied on by the complainant to substantiate the charges under Sections 498A and 323.

The State on the other hand argued that the Trial Court had taken note of all strands of evidence, and that a finding was only rendered after the Court satisfied itself of all facts.

Upon hearing both parties, the Court looked at the ingredients necessary to make out an offence under Section 498A and noted that there existed several inconsistencies in the complainant’s account of the ‘torture’ faced by her at the behest of her husband.

The Court observed:

There is no specific instance of any torture, assault or harassment. There is no mention of any point or period of time of such torture or harassment. Although the de-facto complainant stated that she was about to be killed, two eye witnesses who rescued her did not corroborate the statement of the de-facto complainant that she was about to be killed. The Appellant was not at that spot, according to them. The de-facto complainant was medically examined twice. Both the medical report shows simple injuries like bite marks. There is no mention of any point or period of time of such torture or harassment. The elder brother of the de-facto complainant stated in his evidence that the Appellant used to assault the de-facto complainant on consuming liquor. He did not mention that there was any demand of money on the part of the Appellant. Therefore, conviction under section 498A stands quashed. Conviction and sentence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code stands upheld. The Appellant shall pay fine within fifteen days.

Case: Ranjan Das v The State of West Bengal & Anr.

Coram: Justice Sugato Majumder

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 255

Click Here To Read/Download Order