The Karanataka High Court, in a recent ruling stated that denial of physical intimacy by husband can be considered as cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955, however, it cannot be considered cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Justice M Nagaprasanna made the aforementioned observation, while dismissing the case against a man and his parents, against whom the wife had lodged a criminal case in 2020.
According to the judge, the only allegation made by the wife was that the husband followed a spiritual order and watched videos of a female monk of that order. Inspired by these videos, he believed that love should only be a connection of souls rather than a physical or sexual relationship. The conclusion given by the Judge is that refusal to have a physical relationship with his wife could be considered cruelty due to non-consummation of the marriage under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, however, it did not fit the definition of cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC.
The marriage had taken place on December 18, 2019. However, the marriage deteriorated quickly, and the wife, who stayed at the matrimonial home only for 28 days, filed a criminal complaint against her husband and his parents on 5th February, 2020, invoking section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code. She also filed a complaint with the Family Court, seeking the annulment of the marriage under section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, citing the ground of cruelty due to the non-consummation of the marriage.
A chargesheet against the husband and his parents was filed by the Police, charging them under Section 498A of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The charges were challenged by the husband's parents, asserting that they were unrelated to the issue and were wrongly implicated into the matter. The husband argued that the allegations did not meet the criteria for the offense punishable under Section 498A.
The woman argued that her husband's parents deliberatley arranged the marriage and that her husband showed no interest in developing an intimate relationship with her. Therefore, she sought the annulment of the marriage, claiming that it constituted cruelty. Despite the marriage being annulled by a Family Court order on November 16, 2022, she decided to pursue the criminal proceedings, as she believed it amounted to cruelty in terms of demanding dowry.
After reviewing the arguments and evidence presented by both the parties, it was observed by Justice Nagaprasanna that the complainant-wife was aware of her husband's attitude before the marriage. Nonetheless, she proceeded with the marriage under family pressure, hoping that her husband would change. The judge noted that neither the complaint nor the summary chargesheet mentioned any incidents during the 28-day period that would constitute an offense under section 498A of the IPC.
It was acknowledged by the Judge that a divorce decree had already been granted to the complainant based on the grounds of non-consummation of the said marriage, which can be considered as & lsquo cruelty' under the Hindu Marriage Act. However, it was emphasised by the judge that criminal proceedings cannot be allowed to continue on the same basis. Thereafter, the judge concluded that allowing the proceedings to continue would result in harassment, an abuse of the legal process of law and ultimately result in miscarriage of justice, as there are no valid allegations against the husband.
If you require legal advice for your divorce matter, you can click on the link to consult with Top Rated Divorce Lawyers in India.
662+ Lawyers are online 
.jpg)
.jpg)
