The Allahabad High Court recently dismissed a cruelty case filed by a wife against her husband, highlighting that the conflict stemmed from “sexual incompatibility” rather than cruelty or dowry demands.
The couple, married in 2015, faced ongoing marital issues. The wife alleged that after their marriage, the husband and his family demanded dowry. She claimed that when the dowry was not provided, she faced abuse and assault. Additionally, she accused her husband of alcoholism, demanding unnatural sexual activities, and exhibiting inappropriate behavior like watching pornography, roaming around naked, and masturbating in front of her. She alleged that when she objected, her husband tried to strangle her.
The husband later moved to Singapore, leaving the wife with his family. After eight months, when the wife joined him in Singapore, she reported further mistreatment.
A case was filed against the husband and his family under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, including Section 498A, which addresses cruelty toward a wife. The case also included charges under the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The husband and his family approached the Allahabad High Court, requesting to quash the case. The court reviewed the facts and observed that the wife’s allegations were vague and lacked specific instances of cruelty or dowry demands. According to the court, the wife had not sustained any physical injuries, and the accusations of dowry demands were general and non-specific.
While examining the case, the court concluded that the core issue was the couple’s sexual incompatibility. The court pointed out that the reported mistreatment did not appear to be related to dowry but was instead tied to disagreements about fulfilling sexual urges.
The court ruled that the wife’s claims did not constitute cruelty as defined by Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and dismissed the case, citing the lack of substantial evidence.
Justice Anish Kumar Gupta, in his ruling, noted that the conflict between the couple primarily revolved around their differences in sexual compatibility, which led to the filing of the complaint. The court emphasized that the claims of dowry demands and torture were vague and unsubstantiated.
This decision highlights the complexities involved in marital disputes, particularly when issues of sexual compatibility arise alongside legal claims of cruelty and dowry harassment.
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==
