The Patna High Court ruled that simply calling one’s wife “Bhoot” (ghost) or “Pisach” (flesh-eating demon) does not constitute ‘cruelty’ under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to cruelty towards a wife by her husband or his relatives.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
BIHAR: The Patna High Court elucidated that derogatory terms such as “Bhoot” (ghost) and “Pisach” (flesh-eating demon) directed at a wife by her husband do not, in themselves, constitute ‘cruelty’ under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which addresses cruelty towards a wife by her husband or his relatives.
Justice Bibek Chaudhuri emphasized that within the context of failed marriages, the use of offensive language does not always meet the criteria for cruelty. He remarked,
“Abusing a person by saying ‘Bhoot’ and ‘Pisach’ does not automatically amount to an act of cruelty. In matrimonial relations, especially those that have broken down, instances of verbal abuse are not uncommon. However, not all such accusations fall within the purview of ‘cruelty’.”
The Court’s ruling came in response to a revision petition filed by a man and his father challenging their conviction under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The complaint, lodged by the father-in-law of the accused-man, alleged that the duo demanded a Maruti car as dowry from the man’s wife and subjected her to assault when the demand was not met.
Despite the conviction by the trial court and subsequent affirmation by an appellate court, the High Court overturned the decision. It observed that the letters purportedly detailing the incidents were not presented during the trial. Furthermore, the Court noted the absence of specific evidence substantiating the allegations of dowry demand and subsequent cruelty.
The High Court concurred with the petitioners’ assertion regarding the lack of specificity in the allegations and the absence of evidence corroborating the complainant’s claims. It concluded that the case appeared to stem from personal animosity and disputes between the parties rather than a genuine legal grievance.
Moreover, the Court reiterated its authority to employ inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to rectify miscarriages of justice.
In light of these considerations, the High Court allowed the revision petition, quashing the previous conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports of Patna High Court
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
