The Bombay High Court recently raised concerns about the misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with cruelty by a husband or his relatives. The Court highlighted that it is common for distant relatives of the husband to be wrongly accused in such cases, even when they live separately and have no involvement.
Justice Vibha Kankanwadi, a single-judge bench, quashed domestic violence charges against Jyoti Patil. Despite living far from the complainant’s husband, Patil was named in the case simply because she was related to the husband.
Justice Kankanwadi noted, “Both this Court and the Supreme Court have often observed that it has become a trend to name all of the husband’s relatives as respondents in Section 498A cases. This misuse of legal proceedings has not reduced over time. Distant relatives who never lived with the husband should not have to face legal action based on vague allegations of domestic violence. Therefore, this application to quash the proceedings is justified.”
The case was brought forward by Jyoti Patil, who sought to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against her by her sister-in-law. The complainant-wife accused her in-laws and Patil of harassment and domestic violence. However, the complainant herself mentioned that her in-laws lived in Pune, while Patil resided in Bhusawal, working as a veterinarian.
The Court found that the complainant failed to prove that Patil and the complainant ever lived together in the same household. Due to the lack of evidence and supporting documents showing different addresses, the Court ruled that the proceedings against Patil should be quashed.
In light of these findings, the Court dismissed the proceedings against Jyoti Patil.
Case: Jyoti Ganesh Patil vs State of Maharashtra
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==
