Path: Home » NEWS against MEN » 498A/ Domestic Violence » Allahabad HC: Cruelty Case Quashed, Court Cites Sexual Incompatibility

Allahabad HC: Cruelty Case Quashed, Court Cites Sexual Incompatibility

Allahabad High Court Quashes Cruelty Case, Says Dispute Arose from Sexual Incompatibility

The Allahabad High Court recently dismissed a cruelty case filed by a wife against her husband, observing that the conflict between the couple stemmed mainly from “sexual incompatibility” rather than dowry harassment or physical cruelty.

The couple married in 2015. The wife alleged that her husband and in-laws made dowry demands and subjected her to abuse when she did not comply. She further claimed that her husband was addicted to alcohol, demanded unnatural sex, frequently watched pornography, and behaved in an indecent manner by roaming naked and masturbating in front of her. She also alleged that when she resisted, he attempted to strangle her.

Later, she stated that her husband left for Singapore, and when she joined him after eight months, he continued to torture her. Based on her complaint, a case was filed against the husband and his family under Sections 498A (cruelty by husband or relatives), 323 (hurt), 504 (insult), 506 (criminal intimidation), 509 (insult to modesty of a woman) of the IPC, along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

The husband and his family, however, approached the High Court seeking to quash the proceedings.

After reviewing the case, Justice Anish Kumar Gupta held that the allegations were vague and lacked evidence. The Court noted that the wife did not sustain any injury and that there were no specific details of dowry demands made by any individual.

The Court observed that the dispute appeared to be linked to the refusal of the wife to meet her husband’s sexual expectations, leading to marital discord.

“From the facts of the case, by no stretch of imagination can it be said to amount to cruelty under Section 498A IPC. The allegations are general and vague. The dispute arises due to sexual incompatibility between the parties,” the Court stated while quashing the case.

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==

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *