Path: Home » NEWS against MEN » 498A/ Domestic Violence » Delhi High Court Rules Extramarital Affairs and Betting Habits Are Not Grounds for Dowry Death Charges

Delhi High Court Rules Extramarital Affairs and Betting Habits Are Not Grounds for Dowry Death Charges

The Delhi High Court recently stated that a husband’s extramarital affair or gambling habits cannot be used as a reason to charge him under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with dowry death.

In a ruling on September 5, Justice Vikas Mahajan noted, “Neither the husband’s extramarital affair nor his betting activities can be a basis for implicating him under Section 304B IPC.” This statement was made during a bail plea related to a case filed under Section 304B (dowry death) and Section 34 (common intention) of the IPC.

The case involves a couple who married in 2020. The wife, who died by suicide in August last year, discovered that her husband was having an extramarital affair and was involved in betting. As their relationship deteriorated, she filed several cases against him, including a divorce petition. Following her death, her father lodged a police complaint under Section 304B of the IPC.

The husband argued that due to their marital issues, they had been living apart since April 2021. He also mentioned that the wife had been receiving treatment for anxiety and depression.

The woman’s father claimed in his police statement that the husband had met his daughter the day before her death and threatened her. However, the court observed that the father did not mention any dowry demand made by the husband during that meeting.

When asked by the court, the prosecution admitted that there was “nothing on record” indicating that the husband demanded dowry after the wife left her marital home in April 2021.

The court concluded that since the investigation was complete and the charge sheet had been filed, there was no need to keep the husband in custody. Consequently, the high court granted him bail after he provided a personal bond of ₹25,000 and a surety bond of the same amount, with certain conditions attached.

Case: Parul vs. NCT Of Delhi

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Your email address will not be published.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 *