SC: Merely Stating Cruelty by In-Laws Won’t Be an Offence under Section 498-A of IPC

Apex court said the complaint was lodged after the notice of divorce which had no whisper of allegations of the cruelty caused by the appellants.

New Delhi:The Supreme Court, citing the misuse of anti-dowry laws by a woman to harass her in-laws, said only stating that cruelty has been committed by the in-laws would not amount to the offence under Section 498-A of IPC being attracted.

A bench comprising justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan said anti-dowry laws were being used as a "weapon" in a personal discord between the estranged couple while quashing the criminal proceedings against the in-laws of the woman.

“These facts lead us to conclude that the proceedings were initiated with an ulterior motive of pressurizing the son of the appellant herein to consent to the divorce according to the terms of the complainant and the proceedings were used as a weapon by the complainant in the personal discord between the couple”, said the bench, in a judgment delivered on December 20.

Justice Gavai, who authored the judgment on behalf of the bench, said: “In our view, only stating that cruelty has been committed by the appellants herein due to some reason, would not amount to the offence under Section 498-A of IPC being attracted”.

Justice Gavai said the complaint was lodged after the notice of divorce was given by the complainant, wherein, there was not even a whisper of the allegation of the cruelty or the miscarriage caused by the appellants (in-laws). The alleged incident took place in 2016, whereas the complaint was filed after the notice of divorce was given by the complainant, i.e. in 2018.

The bench noted that the notice of divorce on the other hand contained allegations relating to the demand of money and jewellery from the complainant by the son of the appellants'. “It also contained vague allegations of physical assault inflicted by the son of the appellants. No allegation of cruelty or the miscarriage allegedly caused by the appellants was raised”, noted the bench.

The bench said the ingredients for an offence to be made out under Section 498-A of IPC require that there has to be cruelty inflicted against the victim which either drives her to commit suicide or causes grave injury to herself or lead to such conduct that would cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health.

The apex court, noting that during the pendency of these proceedings, a family court in Latur in May 2019 granted a decree of divorce by mutual consent and dissolved the marriage, said: “We, therefore, hold that the continuance of the criminal proceedings against the appellants would result in an abuse of process of law”.

Allegations regarding a specific incident relating to the miscarriage being caused by the in-laws, the bench said a bare perusal of the allegation and the analysis of the same when compared with the statement of the doctor reveals that even if the allegations are accepted at the face value, it would not prima facie make out a case against the present appellants'.

The apex court delivered the judgment on a plea against a January 2020, judgment of the Bombay High Court dismissing the appellants’ plea seeking quashing of an FIR lodged against them at Latur, Maharashtra, in November 2018.

The woman alleged harassment for allegedly not giving birth to a male child. She claimed that her in-laws coerced her to eat a meal which purportedly led to her miscarriage.