Read Time: 10 minutes
The court was hearing a case where a woman, who entered into an interfaith marriage, committed suicide and the accused argued that there was no legal marriage and Section 498A IPC did not apply, claiming that she was a minor
The Kerala High Court has upheld the conviction of the husband and in-laws under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), in a case where an allegedly minor hindu woman converted to Islam for contracting a marriage with a muslim man. The court ruled that women can seek protection under Section 498A of the IPC for matrimonial cruelty, even in cases where the marriage is later found invalid under the law, provided the marriage has the “colour of a legal marriage” through religious or customary practices.
The court, presided over by Justice Sophy Thomas, observed, “if there was some form of marriage, religious or customary, which has the colour of a legal marriage, then also the woman can seek protection under Section 498A, though later, for some reason, that marriage is found to be invalid in the eye of law.”
The case revolves around a woman who was a Hindu by birth but fell in love with the first accused, a Muslim man and became pregnant. Her pregnancy was allegedly forcibly aborted by the parents of the accused. Following this, she embraced islam in order to contract a marriage with the accused. Due to her minority, a marriage could not be contracted immediately and she went to the accused’s house and started living with him and his parents. A marriage agreement was registered on June 10, 2002, between her and the first accused. However, the woman was faced with ill- treatment and harassment on demands of dowry from her husband and his family and unable to bear the circumstances, she committed suicide by consuming poison on June 19, 2002.
The trial court found the accused—husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law, and brother-in-law— guilty under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC, and sentenced them to three years’ imprisonment. Aggrieved by the conviction the accused filed the present appeal before the High Court, arguing that there was no valid legal marriage as the woman was a minor, and only a registration agreement existed. It was contended that Section 498A IPC could not apply without a valid marital relationship.
The court, after examining the facts and circumstances of the case, observed that while the Nikah was not registered under secular law, it was conducted in accordance with Muslim Personal Law after the woman converted to Islam. The court found no evidence proving the woman was a minor at the time of marriage, and even if she was, under Muslim law, a marriage post-puberty is considered valid.
“There is nothing to show that (the woman) was a minor at the time of ‘Nikah’. If at all she was a minor, under Muslim Law, a minor girl can contract marriage after attaining puberty. Under Mohammedan Law, still that marriage is recognised as valid,” the court stated.
The court emphasised that religious or customary marriages that have the “colour of a legal marriage” could attract Section 498A IPC, even if later found invalid under secular laws due to factors like age, mental status, or consanguinity. The court further clarified that “the marriage under the customary or personal law, which is otherwise valid, has to be treated as valid between parties to that marriage for all practical purposes, unless and until it is challenged by any of the parties to that marriage, and declared void on any valid grounds.”
The court relied on the principles established in Reema Aggarwal vs. Anupam (2004), where the Supreme Court held that the term "husband" in Section 498A of the IPC covers a person who, despite the legitimacy of the marriage, subjects a woman to cruelty. The Court emphasised that even if the marriage's legality is in question, the provisions under Sections 498A and 304B IPC aim to protect women from cruelty and dowry-related harassment. “Legislation enacted with some policy to curb and alleviate some public evil rampant in society and effectuate a definite public purpose or benefit positively requires to be interpreted with a certain element of realism too and not merely pedantically or hypertechnically,” the court noted, reiterating that offences under special statutes like the Dowry Prohibition Act prevail even if the validity of the marriage is questioned.
Based on this ruling, the HC rejected the argument that the absence of a formal legal marriage between the deceased and the first accused precluded a conviction under Section 498A.
Therefore, the conviction of the accused husband and in-laws of the deceased under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC was affirmed, and the court found no reason to interfere with the trial court's decision.
Cause Title: X v State of Kerala [CRL.A NO.847 OF 2007]
Please Login or Register
