The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a man in a live-in relationship without legally ending his previous marriage may be committing the offence of bigamy under IPC Sections 494 and 495.
The Supreme Court has quashed a criminal case under Section 498A IPC against a woman’s in-laws, noting inconsistencies in her complaint and clear signs of malicious intent.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that a husband cannot be charged with rape under IPC, as Indian law does not currently recognise marital rape. The Court dismissed the FIR filed by the wife of MLA Umang Singhar.
The Jharkhand High Court ruled that not giving proper medical treatment to a wife in order to pressure her for dowry is considered cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC. The Court upheld the husband’s conviction in such a case.
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 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.
A 22-year-old woman was arrested in Chhattisgarh for throwing acid on her ex-boyfriend during his wedding. The attack left the groom, bride, and 10 guests with minor burns. Police found that the woman disguised herself as a man to carry out the act.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that a mother-in-law telling her daughter-in-law to do household work more perfectly does not amount to cruelty or dowry harassment. The court set aside the conviction under Section 304B IPC due to lack of strong evidence.
The Bombay High Court ruled that mental cruelty under Section 498A IPC can happen even when in-laws live separately. The court dismissed an attempt by the husband’s relatives to cancel a dowry and cruelty case.
The Madras High Court reduced a woman’s life sentence to 10 years in jail for setting her minor daughter on fire after a fight. The court ruled that the act was not intentional murder but a result of a heated argument.
