Bombay High Court: Forcing bride to sleep on carpet is verbal abuse, not cruelty

The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court set aside a 20-year-old court order that found a man and his family guilty of cruelty to his late wife. The court said allegations of not allowing their daughter-in-law to watch television, forcing her to sleep on the carpet, not allowing her to visit the temple alone, mocking her and verbally abusing her were not “grave” acts under Article 498A. Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) says: “Whoever is the husband of a woman or the relative of her husband, and inflicts cruelty upon her, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and may also be liable to fine.”

The Supreme Court observed that the nature of these allegations regarding domestic problems would not involve physical and mental torture. The man, along with his brother and parents, were acquitted by the high court for these crimes and IPC Section 306 (abetment to suicide). The couple married in December 2002, and the woman committed suicide in May 2003 due to alleged mistreatment by her mother-in-law.

A single judge bench of Justice Abhay S Waghwase dismissed the allegations of cruelty against him in an order on October 17. The woman’s family also complained about her mother-in-law demanding dowry and sending her to fetch water in the middle of the night.

However, the court noted that the Varangaon village where they lived usually got its water needs around midnight and that families went to get water at this time.

“Almost two months have passed since the meeting of the deceased, the complainant and the witnesses. They (the deceased’s mother, uncle and aunt) admitted that there was no written or verbal communication with the deceased, nor did it convey that there was a case of cruelty close to suicide. There is no evidence to suggest that there was any demand, cruelty or ill-treatment at that point or at a time close to the suicide that would link these to the suicidal death. The high court said what triggered the suicide remains a mystery, LiveLaw reported.

(With input from institutions)