Unemployed Husband Perhaps Had "Inferiority Complex" From Working Wife: Karnataka High Court While Upholding Conviction U/S 498A IPC

The Karnataka High Court recently upheld a husband's conviction under Section 498-A (Cruelty) IPC for harassing his wife, stating that he perhaps developed inferirority complex.

A single judge bench of Justice Ramachandra D.Huddar while dismissing the revision petition filed by H D Naveen observed,

“Accused No.1 is unemployed. Perhaps he must be having an inferiority complex as his wife complainant is a BA., B.Ed. graduate, working as a teacher. That must have made the accused No.1 and his family members to harass the complainant by making unlawful demands and harassed her physically and mentally.”

Naveen had challenged the trial court order dated 9.11.2012, which was affirmed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga vide order dated 31.7.2014, convicting and sentencing him for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC to undergo imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- with default sentence.

The wife had alleged that they got married in 2007. After the marriage, she went to the matrimonial home to reside with accused no.1. In the said house, the other accused named in the complaint in all seven persons were residing. It was alleged that everyday these accused nos.1 to 7 named in the complaint used to ill-treat and harass the complainant both physically and mentally. Even sometimes, they assaulted her and used to abuse her in filthy language, it was said. Therefore, she filed a complaint for the offence punishable under Sec.498A of IPC and Sec.3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

The petitioner argued that the evidence so adduced by the prosecution suffers from serious infirmities, improvements and contradictions. Further, there was a delay of filing the complaint for 5 months and 10 days.

Findings:

On going through the evidence of the complainant and other witnesses the bench said evidence of complainant, her brother and a relative does demonstrate that there was a persistent ill-treatment and harassment of complainant physically and mentally by the accused.

“Fortunately in this case there was not abatement to commit suicide but other factors with regard to the proof of ill-treatment and harassment have been spoken to by PW.1 being the victim. The cruelty for the purpose of offence need not be physical. Even mental torture or abnormal behaviour may amount to cruelty or harassment in a given case.”

It added, “Mental cruelty, ofcourse, varies from person to person, depending upon the intensity and the degree of endurance, some may meet with courage and some others suffer silently, to some, it may be unbearable and a weak person may think of ending one's life.”

The Court found the allegations so made against accused to be genuine and therefore said there is no factual or legal error in lower courts orders.

The court rejected the argument of the accused seeking leniency by imposing fine instead of being sentenced to prison term on being held guilty. It said “Now-a-days there is an increase in the offence against the married woman by the husband and relatives of the husband. Because of the increase in such offences, Section 498A of IPC was introduced in the year 1983 to protect married women from being subjected to cruelty by the husband or his relatives.”

Noting that there was no attempt made by him as per the submission of the State to bring back his wife to lead a happy marital life, Court accused No.1 is not having any love and affection towards his wife. 

Accordingly it dismissed the petition and directed the trial court to take appropriate steps to secure the accused to undergo the remaining sentence.

Case Title: H D Naveen And State of Karnataka

Case No: CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION No.912/2014

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 153

Date of Order: 31-03-2023

Appearance: Jagan Mohan M.T for Petitioner.

K.Nageshwarappa, HCGP for Respondent.

Click Here To Read/Download Order