The Calcutta High Court’s Jalpaiguri bench recently held that the routine bickering between a husband and wife would not attract cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
A Single-Judge bench of Justice Sugato Majumdar, therefore, quashed the conviction under Section 498A of IPC of a man charged for subjecting his wife to mental and physical cruelty.
It, however, upheld his conviction as well as sentence of ₹1000 fine under Section 323 of the IPC.
The Court held, “Cruelty contemplated in Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is different from day to day bickering between the husband and wife. Sweeping and general allegations cannot be relied upon to conclude that offence under Section 498A has been perpetrated.”
The trial court committed an error in concluding that the appellant husband is guilty of an offence under section 498A, the Court further concluded.
The bench further held, “There are latches on the part of the Trial Court in appreciation of evidence. Therefore, conviction under Section 498-A is liable to be quashed.“
As per the prosecution case, the appellant’s wife lodged a First Information Report (FIR) against him and his mother too on May 31, 2016 making allegations of demanding dowry, torture, and attempt to murder.
She alleged that her husband and in-laws demanded ₹50,000 from her as dowry and when she failed to bring that amount from her parents, they subjected her to mental as well as physical torture. She also alleged that once her husband even attempted to kill her near a railway station but was saved by two passersby.
A Sessions Court in Cooch Behar’s Tufangunj convicted the appellant under charges of cruelty under Section 498A and voluntarily causing hurt under Section 323.
He was sentenced to six months simple imprisonment for cruelty under Section 498A and ₹1,000 fine for the offence of causing hurt under Section 323.
Justice Majumdar noted that the prosecution fell short of pointing out any specific incident of torture, assault, and harassment. The judge also said that even the wife’s elder brother said in his testimony that her husband used to assault her only when he consumed liquor and did not mention that there was any demand for money from the appellant.
The bench also noted, “Although the complainant wife stated that she was about to be killed, the two eye witnesses who rescued her did not corroborate her statement. The appellant was not at that spot, according to them. The wife was medically examined twice and both the medical reports show simple injuries like bite marks.“
Therefore, the bench quashed the conviction order to the extent the trial court convicted the appellant under Section 498A.
It, however, maintained his conviction and sentence under Section 323 of the IPC.
Advocate Hillol Saha Podder appeared for the Appellant. While advocate Aditi Shankar Chakraborty and Saurav Ganguly appeared for the State.
News Source: https://www.barandbench.com/news/daily-bickering-between-husband-wife-not-cruelty-section-498a-ipc-calcutta-high-court
You May Also Like:
Quashing of FIR U/s 498A IPC 
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SECTION 34, 120B AND 149 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 
Evidence of woman’s relatives in matrimonial dispute can’t be brushed aside terming them ‘interested witnesses’: Madras High Court 
The Supreme Court Decides that Husband Cannot be Convicted for Dowry Death Based Solely on Wife’s Unnatural Death in Matrimonial Home within Seven Years of Marriage