In a significant ruling, the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court has overturned a 2004 conviction of a man and his family for cruelty and abetment to suicide following the death of his wife. The court found that domestic restrictions, such as not allowing the woman to watch television, preventing her from visiting the temple alone, and making her sleep on a carpet, did not meet the legal definition of “cruelty” under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The case, which involved the woman’s suicide in 2003, had initially resulted in the family being convicted by the Jalgaon Trial Court. However, Justice Abhay S. Waghwase, in his judgment delivered on October 17, ruled that the complaints were centered on domestic issues and did not amount to severe mental or physical cruelty required for a conviction under Section 498A.
The prosecution had argued that these actions, along with other alleged mistreatment, had driven the woman to take her life. However, the court noted a lack of direct evidence linking these incidents to her suicide. The bench observed that there were no signs of severe or consistent abuse leading up to her death.
The court further noted that the woman had not communicated any signs of mistreatment to her family in the two months preceding her suicide. Her last visit to her family was during the Holi festival, nearly two months before the tragic incident. The court found no evidence of communication, either written or verbal, reporting cruelty close to the time of her death.
The allegations of taunting, making her fetch water late at night due to village water supply schedules, and restricting her social interactions were considered by the court. However, these were deemed insufficient to establish a pattern of cruelty or harassment. The judgment highlighted that cruelty is a relative term and varies from person to person, making it difficult to apply a strict definition in such cases.
The court concluded that the trial court’s judgment was erroneous and based on non-specific and minor allegations. It stated that these minor domestic disputes did not meet the necessary criteria for cruelty or abetment to suicide under the IPC.
The Bombay High Court’s ruling emphasizes that not all domestic disagreements or discomforts can be classified as cruelty, especially if there is no consistent or severe mistreatment involved.
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
