The Calcutta High Court has ruled that asking an educated and earning wife to share household expenses or pay EMIs for a joint property cannot be considered “cruelty” under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
In a landmark judgment delivered on September 3, 2025, Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta quashed criminal proceedings against a doctor, Dr. Hiralal Konar, and his son. The Court clarified that normal family expectations and financial responsibilities between spouses should not be stretched to invoke strict provisions of the anti-dowry law.
The case began when the son’s wife filed a complaint at Patuli Police Station on March 15, 2022, alleging physical, mental, and economic abuse by her husband and in-laws. She accused them of criticizing her appearance, making caste-based remarks, assaulting her, demanding dowry, and neglecting her. Based on these claims, police filed charges under Sections 498A, 406, 506 IPC, the Dowry Prohibition Act, the Juvenile Justice Act, and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The husband’s counsel argued that the complaint was vague, exaggerated, and filed to harass the family. He also highlighted that the investigation was mechanical and failed to establish the essential elements of the alleged offences.
After reviewing the complaint, case diary, and witness statements, Justice Gupta made the following key observations:
- The allegations of cruelty lacked specific dates, times, or medical evidence.
- The alleged caste-based insult happened inside the matrimonial home, not in public view, making the SC/ST Act inapplicable (as clarified in Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand).
- Routine expectations such as contributing to household expenses, paying EMIs, making online purchases during the Covid-19 lockdown, or helping in childcare do not amount to cruelty under Section 498A IPC.
- The long delay in filing the first complaint, despite claims of ongoing cruelty since marriage, weakened the credibility of the allegations.
The Court also referred to the Supreme Court judgment in Dara Lakshmi Narayana v. State of Telangana, which warned against the misuse of Section 498A IPC for personal disputes.
With these findings, the Calcutta High Court quashed the criminal case, protecting the husband and his father from prosecution.
Case Title: Dr. Hiralal Konar & Anr. v. The State of West Bengal & Anr.
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==
