
Bombay High Court: Continuous Cruelty Must Be Proven Under Section 498A
The Bombay High Court ruled that to prove cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC, the woman must face continuous mistreatment close to the time of filing the complaint.
The Bombay High Court ruled that to prove cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC, the woman must face continuous mistreatment close to the time of filing the complaint.
The Bombay High Court has ordered the release of a man confined in a rehabilitation centre on his wife’s instructions, stating that no medical records justified the detention.
The Bombay High Court stated that a second marriage while the first marriage is still valid amounts not only to bigamy but also rape if done under false promises, and rejected a plea to dismiss the FIR.
The Bombay High Court granted bail to a 22-year-old college student accused of rape, noting possible consensual relations and prolonged custody. The FIR was filed days after the incident, based on advice from the complainant’s ex-boyfriend.
The Bombay High Court ruled that a woman’s earning does not disqualify her from receiving maintenance. If her income is insufficient to maintain the lifestyle she had during marriage, the husband must provide support.
The Bombay High Court clarified that it cannot instruct the government to make IPC Section 498A, related to cruelty to wives, a compoundable offence. The Court said this decision belongs to the legislature.
The Bombay High Court ruled that the absence of a wisdom tooth is not enough to prove a survivor’s age in a POCSO case. The accused was acquitted as the prosecution failed to confirm that the victim was under 18.
The Bombay High Court ruled that condoning serious misconduct by a woman Sarpanch under the pretext of women empowerment weakens democratic values. The Court upheld her removal, emphasizing that true empowerment requires accountability.
The Bombay High Court has ruled that a man cannot escape his responsibility to pay maintenance to his estranged wife and children, even if he is facing financial difficulties. The court said this is both a moral and legal duty.
An emotional scene unfolded at the Bombay High Court when an 11-year-old boy refused to go with his father despite a court order. The child ran back into the court building, forcing the bench to step in again and issue fresh directives for custody transfer at a police station.