The Patna High Court, while setting aside an order of conviction under Section 498A held that a husband calling his wife 'Bhoot' or 'Pisach' itself does not constitute an act of cruelty and observed that in matrimonial relations, especially in failed matrimonial relations, there are incidents where both the husband and wife abuse each other by using filthy language, however, all such accusations do not come within the veil of “cruelty'.
Brief Facts:
The present revision was filed by the petitioner, convicted under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, challenging the order of conviction.
Contentions of the Petitioners:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that both the Trial Court as well as the Court of Appeal. convicted and sentenced the Petitioners to rigorous imprisonment for one year for an offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 1961 on the basis of the omnibus allegation made by the father of the wife of the contesting Petitioner No. 2.
Contentions of the Respondents:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the Petitioners used to abuse her by saying “Bhoot” (ghost) and “Pisach” and further submitted that a lady in 21* Century is abused by saying “Bhoot” and “Pisach”. And this is a form of immense cruelty perpetrated by the Petitioners upon the daughter of the de facto complainant.
Observations of the Court:
The court first rejected the argument that just by calling his wife 'Bhoot' and 'Pishach', the husband inflicted cruelty on his wife and stated that though the wife stated in her evidence that she informed the matter regarding the torture to her father by a series of letters, however, not a single letter was produced by the de facto complainant during the trial of the case.
The court further stated that no document was produced to show that the contesting Petitioners personally demanded a Maruti Car and on non-fulfilment of such demand, the wife (daughter of the de facto complainant) was subjected to cruelty and stated that no specific distinct allegations were made against the husband or his family members. The court concluded that the case under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code was the outcome of personal grudges and differences between both parties.
The decision of the Court:
The court allowed the petition and set aside the order of conviction.
Case Title: X vs The State of Bihar
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri
Case no.: CR. REV. NO.923 of 2018
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Sharvan Kumar, Mr. Vishal Kumar, Mr. Dinesh Maharaj
Advocate for the Respondents: Mx. Anand Kumar, Mr. Ravi Bhardwaj.
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
