Recently, the Kerala High Court held that acts of body shaming by a husband and his family members could prima facie constitute cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court emphasized that such acts fall within Explanation (a) of Section 498A, which penalizes willful conduct likely to cause mental or physical harm to the wife or drive her to harm herself.
The Case arose from a complaint where the wife alleged marital cruelty by her husband, his father, and her sister-in-law (the wife of her husband’s elder brother). The sister-in-law sought to quash the proceedings under Section 498A IPC, arguing that she did not fall within the definition of “relative” under the provision.
The counsel for the petitioner contended that as the elder brother’s wife, she could not be considered a “relative” under Section 498A. Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in U. Suvetha v. State & Ors., she argued that the term “relative” should be narrowly constructed to include only parents, siblings, and spouses. Additionally, it was argued that the sole allegation against the making of remarks about the complainant’s appearance did not amount to cruelty under Section 498A IPC. Whereas, the complainant’s counsel argued that the petitioner, as a resident of the matrimonial home and the wife of the complainant's husband’s elder brother, should be considered a relative under Section 498A IPC. It was also argued that the precedents cited by the petitioner did not conclusively exclude a brother’s wife from the definition of 'relative' under the said provision.
The Court delved into the interpretation of ‘relative’ under Section 498A IPC and referred extensively to the judgment in U. Suvetha v. State & Ors., the court noted, “In the absence of any statutory definition, the term 'relative' must be assigned a meaning as is commonly understood. Ordinarily, it would include father, mother, husband or wife, son, daughter, brother, sister, nephew or niece, grandson or granddaughter of an individual or the spouse of any such person”. The Court observed that while various statutes provide differing definitions of ‘relative’, for Section 498A IPC, the term encompasses persons residing in the matrimonial home and sharing a proximate relationship by marriage, stating, “When the married woman starts to reside at the matrimonial home, where the siblings of the husband are also residing along with their spouses, it cannot be held that the spouses of the siblings would not fall under the definition of ‘relative’ for the purpose of Section 498A IPC”.
Rejecting the petitioner’s argument, the court stated, “The petitioner, being the wife of the elder brother of the first accused, residing in the matrimonial home, would fall within the ambit of 'relative' under Section 498A IPC”. On the allegations of body-shaming, the court observed, “The statements that the complainant’s body shape made her unsuitable for her husband and that he could find someone better, coupled with questions about the veracity of her medical degree, prima facie constitute cruelty under Section 498A IPC.” The Court held that these acts caused significant mental distress and noted that such behaviour was explicitly addressed under Explanation (a) to Section 498A IPC, which covers willful conduct likely to harm a woman’s mental health.
The court concluded that the allegations of body-shaming and questioning the complainant’s medical qualifications constituted prima facie cruelty under Section 498A IPC. Consequently, the plea to quash the proceedings against the petitioner was dismissed, allowing the case to proceed in accordance with the law.
Case Title: Nimija v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: CRL.MC NO.9443 OF 2022
Coram: Justice A. Badharudeen
Advocate for Appellant: Adv. Thareeq Anver K., K. Salma Jennath, K. Shamsuheen, K.C. Khamarunnisa, Rassal Janardhanan A., Arun Chand, Shahnoy Shaji, Govind G. Nair
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. P.S. Bindu, K. Seena
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
~Siddharth Raghuvanshi
Picture Source :
