A friend cannot be said to be a relative as he is neither a blood relative nor does he have any relation through marriage or adoption, the Court noted.
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court recently held that a husband’s friend is not liable for prosecution under Section 498A of the IPC, as he does not fall within the legal definition of a ‘relative’.
“A friend cannot be said to be a relative as he is neither a blood relative nor he was having any relation through marriage or adoption. Therefore, considering above facts and upon plain reading of Section 498A of the IPC, we come to the conclusion that a friend of husband will not fall under the definition of ‘relative’ of the husband as contemplated under Section 498A of the IPC,” a division bench of Justices Anil Pansare and MM Nerlikar observed.
The case arose from a First Information Report (FIR) filed by a woman in 2022, alleging that her husband, his parents, and his friend had subjected her to cruelty. She specifically accused the friend of frequently visiting their matrimonial home and instigating her husband to demand a plot of land and a car from her father. It was further alleged that the friend encouraged the husband to stop cohabiting with her and to send her back to her parental home if those demands were not met.
While the prosecution argued for a broader interpretation of the term ‘relative’ under Section 498A to include anyone who harasses the wife, the Court relied on a Supreme Court precedent, which held that even a girlfriend or a woman in an extramarital romantic or sexual relationship with the husband cannot be classified as a ‘relative’ under the provision.
Applying the same reasoning, the Court held that a friend does not come within the ambit of a ‘relative’ as contemplated under the provision.
Consequently, the proceedings against the friend were quashed. However, the Court clarified that the case would continue against the husband and his parents.
