The Gujarat High Court quashed a 2019 FIR and observed that many women file exaggerated domestic violence and dowry cases as a tactic to pressure husbands and their families.
The Calcutta High Court has issued guidelines for police and courts regarding arrests in cruelty cases under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Act. The court clarified that arrests should not be automatic and must follow legal procedures.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that not having a physical relationship after marriage is not cruelty under IPC 498A but qualifies as cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act. The court annulled the marriage but dismissed criminal proceedings against the husband.
The Orissa High Court ruled that Section 498A is often misused to pressurize a husband’s family. The court quashed a case against a woman, stating that relatives are sometimes falsely implicated in dowry harassment cases.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that simply mentioning family members in a 498A dowry case is not enough to justify legal action unless their active involvement is proven.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that not having a physical relationship after marriage does not amount to cruelty under IPC 498A but may be grounds for annulment under the Hindu Marriage Act due to non-consummation.
The Karnataka High Court quashed a false dowry case filed by a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, calling it an abuse of the court process. The court noted that the mother-in-law did not reside with the couple and could not have harassed the daughter-in-law.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that not having a physical relationship after marriage doesn’t count as cruelty under IPC 498A but can be grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act due to non-consummation of the marriage.
A 29-year-old woman from Shivamogga, Karnataka, discovered her husband was gay after three years of marriage and filed a police complaint under IPC sections 498A, 420, and 34.
A false dowry case filed against a mother-in-law was quashed by the court, emphasizing the misuse of legal provisions. The court noted that the mother-in-law did not live with the complainant, making the harassment claims baseless.
