Husband's extramarital affair not cruelty, abetment of suicide: Delhi HC
New Delhi, The Delhi High Court on Tuesday said a man's extramarital affair does not amount to cruelty or abetment of suicide unless shown it harassed or tormented the wife.
Justice Sanjeev Narula said an extramarital relationship was not a ground to implicate the husband for dowry death in the absence of a nexus between the alleged relationship and dowry demand.
The court, as a result, granted bail to a man, who was arrested in a case under Sections 498A /304-B aside from Section 306 of IPC, following the unnatural death of his wife in her matrimonial home on March 18, 2024, within nearly five years of marriage.
"The prosecution relies on materials to suggest that the applicant was involved in an extramarital relationship with a woman. Certain videos and chat records have been cited in support. However, even assuming such a relationship existed, the law is settled that an extramarital affair, per se, does not amount to not, cruelty under Section 498A IPC or abetment under Section 306 IPC, unless it is shown that the relationship was pursued in a manner calculated to harass or torment the deceased," the court held.
The verdict went on, "An extramarital relationship cannot be a ground to implicate the accused under Section 304B IPC. The Court held that harassment or cruelty should be linked to dowry demands or sustained mental cruelty that occurred 'soon before the death'."
The man had been in custody since March 2024, and the court noted his continued incarceration would serve no purpose. The court further observed a chargesheet was filed after conclusion of investigation and the trial was not likely to conclude in near future.
There was no risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing from justice and it was well-established that the object of granting bail was neither punitive nor preventative, it added.
The court directed his release on a personal bond of ₹50,000 with two sureties of the like amount.
The woman's family alleged the husband had an affair with his colleague and when confronted, he physically abused her.
The man was further accused of regularly subjecting his wife to domestic violence and pressurising her to secure EMI payments from her family for a car he had purchased.
The court observed no such complaint was made by the woman or her family when she alive and therefore prima facie diluting the immediacy and plausibility of the dowry-related harassment claim.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
an hour ago
- United News of India
Ex-BJP MP Anantkumar Hegde booked in road-rage brawl
Bengaluru, June 24 (UNI) Former Uttara Kannada MP and senior BJP leader Anantkumar Hegde has been booked by Dobbespet police in connection with a violent road-rage incident that occurred on Monday evening near Hale Nijagal on the Bengaluru-Pune National Highway. The FIR names Hegde as the prime accused, alongside his driver Mahesh and personal gunman Sridhar. According to the complaint filed by Saif Khan, a resident of Vasantapura, the incident unfolded when Khan attempted to overtake Hegde's Mahindra XUV-700 with his Toyota Innova, which was carrying women passengers. Following the attempt, Hegde's vehicle allegedly blocked Khan's car, leading to a physical altercation. Saif claimed that Hegde's aides dragged him and others out of the Innova and physically assaulted them. Women in Khan's vehicle were also reportedly manhandled. One of the women began recording the confrontation, visuals of which reportedly show men from Hegde's vehicle punching and slapping the victims. As tensions escalated, two women ran out of the vehicle and shouted for help, drawing the attention of passersby. A crowd quickly gathered, which prompted Hegde's driver to attempt to flee the scene. Saif alleged that his teeth were broken in the assault. He later filed a complaint after receiving treatment at a local health centre. Police have registered a case under IPC Sections 117 (voluntarily causing hurt), 126 (wrongful restraint), 351 (criminal intimidation), and 74 (assault with intent to outrage a woman's modesty). All sections are bailable. Hegde's gunman Sridhar has been accused of brandishing his licensed weapon to threaten the victims. In his statement to police, Sridhar said he acted out of duty to protect the former MP, who allegedly faces life threats. UNI BDN PRS
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Mumbai court clears taxi driver after 17 years; assault charges fall flat
MUMBAI: A Metropolitan Magistrate court at Esplanade on Monday acquitted a 39-year-old taxi driver, Rajender Yadav, of charges under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly assaulting a commuter in 2007, citing insufficient evidence. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The case stemmed from a complaint filed by Manoj Damania, who alleged that while he was waiting to engage a taxi, taxi driver Yadav assaulted him near the Churchgate railway station taxi stand on April 23, 2007, after refusing to take him to Bora Bazar. The complainant claimed Yadav struck him in the face with a key ring, causing serious dental injuries. Damania lodged a police complaint with the Marine Drive police station under IPC sections of 325, which deals with voluntarily causing grievous hurt. While a charge sheet was filed and the complainant deposed in court, the 64th Esplanade Magistrate Court, presided over by Magistrate Hemant Umakant Joshi, observed that the prosecution failed to corroborate the incident with independent witnesses or documentary evidence. Though the complainant stated that 8 to 10 people witnessed the altercation, none were examined. Additionally, the police failed to seize or properly identify the alleged weapon — the key ring. The court noted discrepancies in the complainant's testimony and pointed out that neither the investigating officer nor the medical officer appeared for examination. There was also no conclusive evidence to prove the key ring belonged to the accused. 'The prosecution could not present strong evidence. It is not possible to convict the accused on the basis of mere allegations,' the court stated, acquitting Yadav under Section 248(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Advocate Sunil Pandey for Yadav alleged that he was falsely implicated in the case, claiming he was a victim of circumstances and was trying to resolve the fight with another taxi driver when the police implicated him. The taxi driver got justice after a 17-year-long battle.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 hours ago
- Business Standard
Pune Porsche crash: Prosecution says drunk teen must face trial as an adult
In the Pune Porsche crash case that claimed two young lives in Pune last year, the prosecution has urged the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) to allow the 17-year-old accused to be tried as an adult. The prosecution argued that the teen was fully aware of the consequences of driving under the influence and called the incident a 'heinous offence', reported The Indian Express. The crash took place in the early hours of May 19, 2024, when the speeding Porsche car, allegedly driven by the minor in an inebriated state, rammed into a motorcycle in Kalyani Nagar. The impact killed two IT professionals, Aneesh Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta, both 24, and originally from Madhya Pradesh. On Monday, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Shishir Hiray appeared before the JJB, stressing that the minor was booked under Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) and 467 (forgery), both carrying punishments of ten years or more — making the case fall under the 'heinous offence' category as per Section 2(33) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. 'He knew the consequences' Hiray argued that the teen had not only consumed alcohol but also ignored warnings from the actual driver of the Porsche. 'Still, the minor drove the Porsche after consuming liquor and committed the crime. He knew the consequences of driving under the influence,' said Hiray. He further alleged that the minor was present at Sassoon Hospital when his blood samples were swapped — an act he said proves the teen understood the legal consequences of his actions. 'He was aware that this was a crime. He should be tried as an adult,' Hiray added. According to police submissions, under Section 15(1) of the JJ Act, in cases involving heinous offences, the JJB must assess the minor's mental and physical ability to commit such a crime, his understanding of the consequences, and the circumstances around the act. If the Board is satisfied, it can order an adult trial under Section 18(3). Defence argues for rehabilitation On the other side, senior defence lawyer Prashant Patil opposed the prosecution's request. He argued that the incident, though tragic, stemmed from a moment of recklessness, not criminal intent. 'The child in conflict with law [CCL] has no prior record. He lacked full comprehension of the legal and moral impact of his actions,' Patil said, stressing that the objective of the Juvenile Justice Act is 'reformative' rather than 'punitive'. He further cited the Supreme Court's judgement in Shilpa Mittal vs State of Delhi, asserting that the charges may not legally fall within the ambit of a 'heinous offence' as defined under the JJ Act. Court to assess minor's mindset Patil further submitted that per Section 2(12) of the Act, anyone under 18 is considered a child. 'Even if the act was grave, the law aims to rehabilitate, not punish, the child like an adult,' he said, arguing that the emotional and mental maturity of the accused is not comparable to that of a grown-up. The Juvenile Justice Board is yet to pass an order and will consider psychological evaluations and counselling reports before taking a decision. The next hearing is scheduled for July 15.
