A woman’s defamation complaint against her husband was dismissed by a Delhi court, citing lack of intent to harm. The husband had accused her of adultery in a divorce petition filed in Karnataka.
A Delhi court has recently refused to take cognizance of a defamation complaint filed by a woman against her husband. The husband had earlier filed a divorce petition in Karnataka, accusing the woman of cruelty and adultery.
While rejecting the complaint, the court made it clear that for defamation charges to hold, it is very important that the person making the statement had a clear intention (mens rea) to harm the reputation of the other person.
Read Also:Husband Giving Time, Money To Mother Not Domestic Violence: Court to Wife
The court said,
“A crucial element for completing the offence of defamation is that the imputation (allegation) must have been made with the requisite mensrea (intention) to cause harm to the reputation of the concerned person.”
The woman had claimed that her husband falsely accused her in the divorce case.
According to her, he had said that she was having an affair with her gym trainer, used to meet him secretly, invited him home when the husband was not there, and often went to hotels with him.
She further stated that when her husband was cross-examined during the divorce proceedings, he could not give any proof for these serious allegations.
Eventually, the divorce was granted, but only on the grounds of cruelty—not adultery.
Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Yashdeep Chahal, in his order passed on May 16, refused to take cognizance of the defamation complaint.
He stated,
“I have no hesitation in observing that the version of the complainant fails to disclose the ingredients and nexus necessary for proving the offence of defamation against the accused herein, and thus, no prima facie case is made out for taking cognisance. Accordingly, cognisance is declined under Section 223 of BNSS and the complaint is disposed of.”
The court also questioned why the case was filed in Delhi, even though the divorce proceedings were held in Karnataka.
ALSO READ: SC to Review Unilateral Divorce Rights for Muslim Women via Khula
The judge remarked,
“It is also apparent from how the cause of action has been created in Delhi. To keep the pot boiling is a method which the Courts must be circumspect about. I need not say more.”
The woman had claimed that she was in Delhi visiting a friend when her husband came across the affidavit he had filed in the divorce case.
She said he read the affidavit, and after that, her friend asked her about the allegations made in it.
According to the complainant, the false allegations in the affidavit hurt her image in the eyes of her husband.
The court also gave a strong message about the misuse of the criminal justice system. It said that the higher courts have repeatedly said that criminal cases should not be used to settle personal or financial matters.
The judge said,
“It has been observed by the Constitutional Courts time and again, that the tendency to misuse the criminal machinery for settling monetary/civil scores must be nipped in the bud.”
In addition, the judge noted that the complainant’s request to keep the complaint open while talks for settlement were happening outside the court was not justified.
He said,
“Without expressing much, I may only note that the prayer on behalf of the complainant to keep this complaint pending, for no reason whatsoever till settlement talks are going on outside the Court, only points in the direction alleged by the accused to keep the pressure points on.”
The couple had gotten married on 28 April 2008. However, their relationship turned bitter, and in 2020, the husband filed for divorce in a family court in Bengaluru.
In his petition and supporting affidavit, he sought divorce on the basis of both cruelty and adultery. To prove the adultery claim, he made various allegations against the wife, which later became the basis for her defamation complaint.
In conclusion, the Delhi court found that there was no solid ground to proceed with the defamation case, as the necessary legal conditions were not met.
The court also discouraged using legal proceedings as a tool for pressure or revenge, underlining that the law should not be misused for personal gain.
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Divorce
