NEVER ENDING SAGA OF DOWRY, CRUELTY AND LEGAL FORESIGHTEDNESS: WIFE HAS BEEN GIVE RIGHT TO LODGE COMPLAINT ALMOST FROM ANYWHERE
Never ending saga of dowry, cruelty and legal foresightedness: wife has been give right to lodge complaint almost from anywhere
Supreme Court has held that the courts at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away from the matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by the husband or his relatives, would, dependent on the factual situation, also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging commission of offences under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
Chief Justice of India Justice Gogoi speaking for a three judges bench has passed the judgment tilted as Rupali Devi vs State of Uttar Pradeshon 09.04.2019.
In some earlier cases a view has been taken that if on account of cruelty committed to a wife in a matrimonial home she takes shelter in the parental home and if no specific act of commission of cruelty in the parental home can be attributed to the husband or his relatives, the initiation of proceedings under Section 498A in the courts having jurisdiction in the area where the parental home is situated will not be permissible.
The bench however explained the concept of cruelty. Cruelty can be both physical or mental cruelty. The impact on the mental health of the wife by overt acts on the part of the husband or his relatives; the mental stress and trauma of being driven away from the matrimonial home and her helplessness to go back to the same home for fear of being illtreated are aspects that cannot be ignored while understanding the meaning of the expression “cruelty” appearing in Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The emotional distress or psychological effect on the wife, if not the physical injury, is bound to continue to traumatize the wife even after she leaves the matrimonial home and takes shelter at the parental home. Even if the acts of physical cruelty committed in the matrimonial house may have ceased and such acts do not occur at the parental home, there can be no doubt that the mental trauma and the psychological distress cause by the acts of the husband including verbal exchanges, if any, that had compelled the wife to leave the matrimonial home and take shelter with her parents would continue to persist at the parental home. Mental cruelty borne out of physical cruelty or abusive and humiliating verbal exchanges would continue in the parental home even though there may not be any overt act of physical cruelty at such place.
The Supreme Court went on to observe “The adverse effects on the mental health in the parental home though on account of the acts committed in the matrimonial home would, in our considered view, amount to commission of cruelty within the meaning of Section 498A at the parental home. The consequences of the cruelty committed at the matrimonial home results in repeated offences being committed at the parental home. This is the kind of offences contemplated under Section 179 Cr.P.C which would squarely be applicable to the present case as an answer to the question raised”.
The court since was of the view that Section-179 CrPC would be attracted for such consequences of cruelty, a court will have jurisdiction to entertain an offence under Section-498A IPC where the wife takes shelter.
Supreme Court held as “We, therefore, hold that the courts at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away from the matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by the husband or his relatives, would, dependent on the factual situation, also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging commission of offences under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code”.
Read the judgment here:
MANISHANKAR
CEO-ANTI-CORRUPTION AND HUMAN RIGHTS MOVEMENT®-CHENNAI
Email: anticorruption.org2007@
Mobile: 91 9087856137
Follow us on:
twitter : @anticorp_2007
Comments
Post a Comment