The Delhi High Court has observed that allowing an argument that hospitalisation is a prerequisite for invoking Section 498A of the IPC will close the doors of justice for countless women who endure abuse behind closed doors.

The Court dismissed the anticipatory bail Application filed by a husband under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The Bench took into account the seriousness of the allegations, non-cooperation in the investigation by the husband (Applicant), and his remarriage without the first wife’s (complainant) knowledge or consent.

A Single Bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma held, “Allowing…an argument to prevail – that hospitalization is a prerequisite for invoking Section 498A – would erode the very purpose of the provision. Section 498A of IPC was enacted to address the plight of women who suffer various forms of cruelty, not just physical abuse that results in visible injuries. If this ideology is allowed to grow, it will close the doors of justice for countless women who endure abuse behind closed doors, leaving them trapped in a distressing and oppressive environment.

Advocate Yogesh Sharma represented the Applicant, while APP Raj Kumar appeared for the Respondent.

Brief Facts

The wife alleged that she faced dowry harassment, emotional abuse, and mental torture at the hands of her husband and her in-laws during the course of her marriage. She claimed that her in-laws allegedly demanded Rs. 25 lakhs, threatening divorce if the demand was not met. Her parents managed to arrange Rs. 5 lakhs, but the harassment intensified. The wife further alleged that she was pushed down the stairs by her father-in-law, which forced to leave her matrimonial home.

The husband had submitted that the wife was never hospitalised due to cruelty or harassment committed upon her.

Court’s Reasoning

The High Court held that not only was this argument by the husband unmerited but it also crossed the threshold of having a mentality where to make out a case of Section 498A of the IPC serious, the woman should have injuries and medical treatment record of a hospital.

This contention implies that the woman must be physically beaten and battered to the extent of requiring hospitalisation and only then it will make out a case of cruelty to be covered under Section 498A of IPC. Such a perspective fails to recognise the multifaceted nature of cruelty, which includes mental, emotional, and financial abuse, all of which are equally detrimental and fall within the ambit of Section 498A,” the Court explained.

The Bench noted that the husband had admitted having remarried without obtaining a divorce from the complainant. He had submitted that as per Muslim personal law, he was entitled to get married a second time without obtaining a divorce from the complainant.

Even when the matter was sent for mediation by this Court, the applicant had stated that he could offer only 6 lakhs as full and final settlement and payment of alimony for his wife and their minor child, who is merely 1 ½ years old. This amount, he admitted, was obtained by selling the car worth 13 lakhs that had been given to him as dowry which he has sold for 6 lakhs,” the Bench further noted.

The Court took note of the “serious and distressing nature” of allegagtions. “The conduct of the applicant, as revealed during the investigation and through his own admissions, further aggravates the matter,” it remarked.

Consequently, the Court held, “Once the applicant herein has not joined investigation, despite notices issued to him under Section 41A of Cr.PC, and thereafter issuance of Non-Bailable Warrants, the orders will follow accordingly. The nature of allegations and the conduct of the accused will also be the guiding factor while deciding an application for grant of anticipatory bail…Accordingly, the application for anticipatory bail is dismissed.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the anticipatory bail Application.

Cause Title: Bilal Ansari v. State (Neutral Citation: 2025:DHC:185)

Click here to read/download the Judgment