Neighbour Not ‘Relative’ Under Section 498A IPC: Karnataka HC Quashes Cruelty Case Against Woman

The Karnataka High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings against a woman who was arrayed as an accused in a matrimonial cruelty case solely on the ground that she was a neighbour of the husband and not a member of his family.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna allowed a petition filed by Asha G in a case registered by the Mahalakshmi Layout police, holding that a stranger or neighbour cannot be prosecuted for the offence of cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

The case originated from a complaint lodged on February 13, 2021, by a woman alleging harassment, abuse, and dowry demands by her husband and his family members following their marriage in November 2006. The complainant accused her husband, his parents, and other relatives of demanding money and gold, subjecting her to physical and verbal cruelty, and threatening her when the alleged demands were not met.

Apart from the husband and his family, the complainant also named the petitioner, who lived in the neighbouring house, alleging that she instigated the husband and supported the harassment. Based on these allegations, the police registered offences under Sections 498A, 504, 506, and 323 read with Section 34 IPC, along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and later filed a charge sheet.

Challenging the charge sheet and the summoning order, the petitioner approached the high court contending that she had no familial relationship with the complainant’s husband and was falsely implicated due to personal animosity. It was argued that the only allegation against her was that she instigated the husband, which by itself did not bring her within the scope of Section 498A.

The State opposed the plea, submitting that the petitioner played an active role in provoking the husband and should therefore face trial along with the other accused. The prosecution maintained that her conduct contributed to the cruelty allegedly inflicted on the complainant.

After examining the complaint and the charge sheet, court noted that the petitioner was admittedly a neighbour and not related to the husband by blood or marriage. Court observed that except for a vague allegation of instigation, there were no specific overt acts attributed to her that could justify her prosecution under Section 498A.

Court relied on recent Supreme Court judgment, including Ramesh Kannojiya v State of Uttarakhand, where the apex court had reiterated that neighbours or strangers cannot be treated as “relatives” for the purpose of Section 498A IPC. The provision, being penal in nature, requires strict interpretation and applies only to the husband or his relatives, the court noted.

Justice Nagaprasanna held that permitting the proceedings to continue against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law and result in miscarriage of justice.

Court emphasised that matrimonial disputes, however bitter, cannot be allowed to rope in third parties who fall outside the statutory framework of the offence.

Accordingly, the criminal petition was allowed and the proceedings in the 2021 case were quashed insofar as they concerned the petitioner. Court clarified that its observations were confined to the petitioner’s case under Section 482 CrPC and would not affect the prosecution against the remaining accused, which would continue in accordance with law.

Case Title: Asha G vs State of Karnataka

Order Date: January 6, 2026

Bench: Justice M Nagaprasanna