Kerala High Court Rules Trivial Disputes Aren’t Dowry Harassment Under Section 498A IPC
The Kerala High Court recently ruled that trivial disputes in married life do not constitute dowry harassment or cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC. The court emphasized that both a demand for dowry and acts of cruelty must be present to establish the offense.
In this case, the wife, who filed the complaint, claimed that her husband demanded more dowry and assaulted her at home. However, neither she nor the witnesses could specify the nature of the assault. The court found no evidence of physical assault or injuries, nor any medical reports to support these claims.
Justice P. Somarajan stated, “A demand for dowry or any property or valuable security without the ingredient of ‘cruelty’ as explained under clause (a) or (b) will not attract the said offense, but a combined effect of both these would bring home the liability under Section 498A IPC.”
To constitute cruelty under Section 498A IPC, the court outlined three essential elements:
- Unlawful demand for property or valuable security by the husband or his relatives.
- The act must be directed towards the wife or her relatives.
- The wife or her relatives must be subjected to harassment or cruelty to coerce them into meeting the unlawful demand.
The court clarified that neither ‘harassment’ nor ‘coercion’ is defined in the IPC and should be understood in the context of the mischief the law aims to prevent.
The court referred to Section 15 of the Contract Act for the definition of coercion and explained harassment as actions coercing the wife or her relatives to meet unlawful demands.
The court concluded that minor ill-treatment or trivial disputes between spouses do not constitute cruelty under Section 498A IPC. It also noted past precedents stating that cruelty must be severe enough to drive a woman to suicide or cause grave injury to her mental or physical health.
Justice Somarajan reminded authorities to be cautious when registering cases under Section 498A IPC, advising against implicating husbands and their relatives based on trivial disputes, as this could cause undue suffering and potentially damage marital relationships.
Finding no substantial evidence of assault or any documented history of violence, the court overturned the conviction and sentence of the accused, acquitting him. The revision petition was thus disposed of.
