The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that mere taunts over not conceiving don’t amount to cruelty under Section 498A IPC. Charges against the sisters-in-law were quashed due to lack of specific and serious allegations.
Today (April 25): In a recent judgment, the Andhra Pradesh High Court made an important observation in a case filed under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with cruelty by a husband or his relatives towards a married woman. The Court ruled that a woman cannot drag her sisters-in-law into a criminal case merely because they taunted her for not being able to conceive a child.
Justice Harinath N of the Andhra Pradesh High Court gave this decision while hearing a petition filed by the husband’s parents and sisters. They were all accused by the wife of cruelty and dowry harassment under Section 498A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The High Court decided to cancel the criminal charges against the two sisters-in-law of the complainant, stating that the claims made by the wife were not strong enough to continue legal proceedings against them.
The Court said,
“Taunting on the ground of not being able to conceive cannot be taken as sufficient grounds for continuation of proceedings against petitioners 3 and 4 (sisters-in-law) under Section 498-A IPC and Section 3 and 4 of DP Act.”
The Court also noted that the sisters-in-law had not even stayed in the same house as the complainant after her marriage. They were living separately and therefore could not have caused her any harassment.
The Bench said,
“The petitioners 3 and 4 (sisters-in-law), soon after their marriage, were staying away and as such could not have resorted to any harassment to the third respondent (complainant) and the allegations against the petitioners 3 and 4 cannot be considered as sufficient for punishing them for the offences under Section 498A of IPC and 3 and 4 of DP Act.”
The only accusation made against the sisters-in-law was that they would taunt the woman about her inability to conceive whenever they visited. However, the Court clearly said that such general and vague statements without any specific details are not enough to keep the criminal case alive.
The Court explained,
“Such vague allegations without any specific details as to on what date and when the said taunting was resorted to by (the sisters-in-law) cannot sustain the scrutiny of law.”
In this case, all the relatives of the husband, including his parents and sisters, were made accused by the wife. But the sisters-in-law argued that they had nothing to do with the marital problems between the couple. After going through the facts, the High Court gave them relief and noted that the wife had made them part of the case only to take revenge on her husband.
The Court stated,
“This case is another where the unconnected relatives of the first accused are roped in as accused only for wreaking out vengeance against the first accused.”
While the Court dismissed the charges against the sisters-in-law, it did not quash the case against the complainant’s parents-in-law.
Advocate ML Neelima represented the petitioners (husband’s family), and Advocate Tota Tejeswara Rao appeared on behalf of the complainant (wife).
This judgment is important because it highlights how courts examine family-related criminal complaints carefully and do not allow false or vague accusations to continue unnecessarily, especially when relatives are not directly involved in any harassment.
Click Here to Read More On Section 498 A Of IPC
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
