Justice S.M. Modak, Bombay High Court
Taunting Wife Over Dark Complexion Not 'Cruelty' U/S. 498A IPC: Bombay High Court Acquits Husband
|Trial court had sentenced the husband to five years in prison under Sections 498A (cruelty) and 306 (abetment of suicide) of the IPC.
The Bombay High Court acquitted a husband observing that that taunting his wife for her dark complexion does not amount to cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The case stemmed from a 1995 conviction in which the trial court sentenced the husband to five years in prison under Sections 498A (cruelty) and 306 (abetment of suicide) of the IPC.
A Bench of Justice SM Modak held, “In all prosecution examined five witnesses. There are certain admitted documents. They are evidence and documents. With their assistance, I find that the conviction is not supported by the evidence. On record, though Prema was being taunted on account of her complexion, I do not think that it will fall within the explanation to Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. Even conviction for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be sustained, because the prosecution could not prove the suicide being the outcome of the harassment.”
Advocate Nasreen SK Ayubi appeared for the appellant while Advocate RS Tendulkar appeared for the Respondent.
The Court set aside the conviction of a husband who had been found guilty by a lower court of abetting his wife’s suicide and subjecting her to cruelty.
The High Court found the evidence insufficient to support such a conviction.
The case involved a couple who had married in 1993. Tragically, the wife died by suicide just two years later, in 1995. Following her death, the police filed charges against both her husband and father-in-law. However, the trial court acquitted the father-in-law, while convicting the husband.
One prosecution witness had testified that she was verbally harassed over her dark complexion and criticized for not cooking meals properly. However, the High Court found that such remarks and domestic disputes, though unpleasant, did not constitute cruelty of a degree envisaged under Section 498A.
The Court stated, “I have read the judgment of the trial Court. The trial Court is fully aware about the Explanation-(a) to Section 498-A:- The willful conduct must be of a high degree; however, when the evidence of the three witnesses are considered by the trial Court, there is no finding that the harassment is of high degree. There cannot be such a finding simply for the reason that even if the reasons for harassment are admitted, no case will fall under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. The findings need to be set aside.”
Cause Title: Sadashiv Parbati Rupnawar v. The State of Maharashtra, [2025:BHC-AS:30887]