The Bombay High Court ruled that mental cruelty under Section 498A IPC can be inflicted even if in-laws reside separately. The court dismissed an application to quash criminal proceedings, emphasizing that cruelty is not limited to physical harm.
The Delhi High Court ruled that simply demanding dowry does not qualify as cruelty under Section 498A IPC. It quashed an FIR against distant relatives of the husband, stating that the allegations lacked supporting evidence.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that a wife cannot be charged with extortion for seeking maintenance through the court. The court quashed complaints filed by both spouses, citing a lack of evidence for cruelty or false claims.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that a wife’s love for another man does not amount to adultery unless there is a physical relationship. The court rejected a husband’s plea to deny maintenance, stating that financial support cannot be denied based on emotional attachment.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that a wife’s emotional love for another man does not qualify as adultery unless there is a physical relationship. This decision impacts maintenance claims in legal disputes.
Kannada actress Abhinaya has been sentenced to two years in prison for dowry harassment. The Karnataka High Court also sentenced her mother, Jayamma, to five years. The case, filed in 2002, was reopened after an appeal, leading to their conviction.
The Orissa High Court ruled that an IPC 498A case cannot be dismissed just because the marriage is invalid. The decision ensures that women in such relationships still receive legal protection.
The Supreme Court ruled that a job appointment cannot be denied just because a candidate was tried under IPC Section 498A. If acquitted, past allegations should not impact employment.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that simply mentioning family members in a 498A dowry case is not enough to justify legal action unless their active involvement is proven.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that a wife cannot be charged with extortion for seeking and being granted maintenance. The court dismissed complaints filed by both the husband and wife, emphasizing the legal grounds of maintenance claims.
