The Delhi High Court has ruled that the mere demand of dowry, without evidence of cruelty or harassment, does not amount to an offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court also observed that a simple allegation of intimidation is not enough to establish harassment.
The ruling came in a petition filed by distant relatives of a husband, who had been named in an FIR under Sections 498A, 406, and 34 IPC. Justice quashed the FIR and all related proceedings, holding that the allegations against the petitioners did not meet the threshold of “cruelty” under Section 498A.
Allegations by the Wife
The wife had alleged that the petitioners arranged her marriage despite knowing that the husband and his parents were alcoholics. She further accused them of dowry-related harassment, including demands for property transfer and expensive gifts, which forced her to return to her parental home.
Court’s Observations
The Court examined previous judgments to support its findings:
- In Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand (2010), the Supreme Court cautioned against the trend of implicating the husband and all his relatives in 498A cases.
- In Payal Sharma v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court stressed the need for courts to check whether relatives who do not live with the couple are being falsely implicated.
In this case, the petitioners were accused of asking the wife’s family to transfer property in the husband’s name. However, they never lived with the couple, and the Court found that the allegations appeared exaggerated and lacked credible evidence.
Final Ruling
The Bench held that continuing the proceedings would amount to an abuse of legal process and quashed the FIR against the petitioners.
At the same time, the Court cautioned that this ruling should not be misunderstood as denying the harsh reality of dowry-related abuse, which remains a deeply rooted social evil. The Court clarified that when manipulation and coercion for dowry involve threats to a marriage, such conduct can still amount to harassment under Section 498A IPC.
Cause Title: Vaneeta Gupta & Anr. v. State of NCT of Delhi & 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==
