SC flags 'misuse' of dowry, cruelty provisions against husband's kin

The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed dismay over the misuse of dowry harassment and cruelty provisions by wives against the kin of husbands, including elderly parents, in matrimonial cases.

A bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma said, "The term cruelty is subject to rather cruel misuse by the parties, and cannot be established simpliciter without specific instances, to say the least. The tendency of roping these sections, without mentioning any specific dates, time or incident, weakens the case of the prosecutions, and casts serious suspicion on the viability of the version of a complainant."

The verdict, authored by Justice Sharma, came on an appeal against an Allahabad High Court order convicting the man, who the top court acquitted of offences under Section 498A (cruelty) of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

“Notwithstanding the merits of the case, we are distressed with the manner, the offences under Section 498A IPC, and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 are being maliciously roped in by complainant wives, insofar as aged parents, distant relatives, married sisters living separately, are arrayed as accused, in matrimonial matters."

The verdict underlined the "growing tendency" to include every relative of the husband which cast "serious doubts" on the claims of the wife or her family members and vitiated the objective of a protective legislation.

The bench ruled the wife's allegations of cruelty and dowry harassment were vague, lacking specific details, and unsupported by corroborative evidence. It said criminal conviction couldn't rest on broad or generalised claims.

"We cannot ignore the missing specifics in a criminal complaint, which is the premise of invoking criminal machinery of the state. Be that as it may, we are informed that the marriage of the appellant has already been dissolved and the divorce decree has attained finality, hence any further prosecution of the appellant will only tantamount to an abuse of process of law,” it held.

The verdict noted that allegations shouldn't be ambiguous or made in thin air and pointed out that the present complaint lacked specifics such as dates, times, and concrete incidents of harassment or cruelty. It further noted the absence of medical records to support the claim of a miscarriage caused by an alleged physical assault.

The original complaint was filed in December 1999 against the estranged husband and his family members of mental and physical abuse, dowry demands, and cruelty — allegations stemming from a marriage that lasted barely a year.

The wife claimed physical assault aside from being pressured to resign from her job, administered laced drinks, and being subjected to humiliating parties.

The court, however, observed that apart from the testimonies of the woman and her father, there was no independent or documentary evidence to support the claims.

The verdict noted that the FIR in the case was lodged nearly a year after the husband had filed a divorce petition, raising questions about the timing and intent behind the criminal case.

The bench allowed the appeal and set aside the Allahabad High Court’s 2018 order, acquitting the husband of all charges.