Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently made strong observations regarding the misuse of Section 498A (pertaining to cruelty against women) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court noted the emergence of what can be termed a "package of five cases," where wives are filing multiple cases against husbands and their family members in courts.

The bench of Justice Vivek Rusia further commented that Section 498A of the IPC, designed to address cruelty committed by husbands or their relatives, is presently experiencing misuse. This trend has also been acknowledged by numerous High Courts and the Supreme Court, he stressed. 

The court was hearing a plea to quash a first information report (FIR) lodged by a wife against her husband and his relatives. The FIR was filed under Section 498A (pertaining to cruelty towards a woman by her husband or his relatives) and 323 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Court noted that the woman who filed the complaint was residing overseas while actively pursuing legal actions against her husband's family members in India.

The woman's claim was that her in-laws mistreated her and evicted her from the house once her husband departed for Australia after telling her that he was unhappy due to her parents' failure to meet the demand of Rs 10 lakh and a car.

Moreover, she informed the court that the husband had acquired a divorce decree from an Australian court through an ex-parte proceeding.

Court noted that only general allegations were leveled by the wife against her in-laws and there was a delay of one year in lodging the FIR where assault and demand of dowry were alleged. 

Court further highlighted that at present, the husband and wife both were settled in Australia and the wife had given the Power of Attorney to her father to contest the cases against her in-laws. "This is now a case of reverse cruelty upon them," opined the court. 

Court added that "nowadays it is very common for the husband and wife to reside or do jobs outside of India and their parents are made to suffer in India by way of criminal or matrimonial litigation".

Accordingly, court quashed the FIR concerned and consequently, the charge sheet as well as the proceedings in the criminal case were also quashed.

It is important to note that Calcutta High Court in a recent judgment highlighted the “legal terrorism”, supposedly unleashed by women against their husbands and in-laws. 

In the case, the Calcutta High Court had said that: "The direct allegation against the husband by de-facto complainant is merely from her version. It supports no documentary or medical evidence. One neighbour has heard about the quarrel of the wife and her husband; the quarrel of two persons does not mean or prove who is in aggression or who is aggrieved”

Case Title: RAJAN AND OTHERS V. RAJAN S/O SARAN PRASAD MATHUR AND ANOTHER