The Bombay High Court ruled that mere crying or unhappiness of a wife cannot prove cruelty under Section 498A IPC. The Court acquitted the husband, citing lack of evidence of harassment or abetment to suicide.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
MUMBAI: In an important judgment, the Bombay High Court recently acquitted a man who was earlier convicted under Section 498-A (cruelty by husband or relatives) and Section 306 (abetment of suicide) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The Court made it clear that a mere statement that a woman was unhappy or used to cry is not enough to prove cruelty or harassment beyond a reasonable doubt.
About the Case
The case involved a man whose wife had died by suicide in 1997. Her parents alleged that she was being harassed by her husband and mother-in-law for money and a sewing machine.
They claimed that this constant demand drove her to take her own life by jumping into a river.
However, during the trial, the husband maintained his innocence, stating that he had even filed a missing report on the same day his wife went missing, and that she had left behind all her ornaments at home.
The Trial Court convicted the husband under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC, sentencing him to three years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹1,000. His mother was acquitted.
What the Bombay High Court Said
The Single Bench of Justice M. M. Sathaye reviewed the evidence and found that there was no clear proof of cruelty or abetment.
The Court pointed out that:
“Mere statements that the deceased daughter used to be unhappy and used to weep are not sufficient to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that there was harassment or conduct of such nature and degree that it would drive a woman to commit suicide.”
Justice Sathaye further observed that apart from a single instance where ₹1,000 was given to the husband during Diwali, no other proof of illegal demand or harassment existed.
There were also no specific instances of physical or mental cruelty described by the witnesses — not even by the deceased’s parents.
For someone to be convicted of abetment of suicide (Section 306 IPC), there has to be clear evidence that the accused instigated, conspired, or intentionally aided the victim to commit suicide.
In this case, the Court noted:
- The husband did not instigate his wife.
- There was no conspiracy or continuous mental torture proven.
- The husband’s act of filing a missing report actually showed he was trying to find her, not cover up anything.
- Even during the police inquiry, the parents never mentioned any harassment at that time.
Because of this, the Court held that there was no legal basis to uphold the conviction.
The High Court allowed the Criminal Appeal and acquitted the husband of all charges under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC.
The Bench concluded that “persistent demands” and “mental torture”, as claimed by the prosecution, were not proven with evidence.
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates Pawan Mali, Deepak More
Respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor Vinit Kulkarni
Case Title:
Ramprakash @ Popat Govind Manohar v. State of Maharashtra
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 885 OF 1998
READ JUDGMENT
