Remarks on wife's clothing or cooking not cruelty: Bombay high court

Hindustan Times

2 days ago

MUMBAI: Nearly two weeks after the Bombay high court ruled that taunts over skin colour or cooking skills do not amount to 'cruelty' under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), its Aurangabad bench has made a similar observation—holding that remarks about a wife's clothing or cooking abilities cannot be treated as 'grave cruelty' by husband or relative under section 498-A. The Bombay high court order came in a case involving a woman who had married on March 24, 2022, nearly a decade after divorcing her first husband.(Representational)
The order came in a case involving a woman who had married on March 24, 2022, nearly a decade after divorcing her first husband. She alleged that within two months of her second marriage, her husband and in-laws began harassing her—demanding ₹15 lakh to buy a flat, insulting her, and concealing information about her husband's physical and mental health. She claimed she was driven out of the matrimonial home on June 11, 2023.
On August 12, 2023, she lodged a complaint at Pundlik Nagar police station, Aurangabad, accusing her husband and in-laws of offences under sections 498-A (cruelty), 323 (causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult), 506 (criminal intimidation), read with section 34 (common intention) of the IPC. The case is pending before the chief judicial magistrate.
The woman's counsel argued before the high court that the harassment was both physical and mental, citing restrictions on her communication, accusations about her character, and monitoring of her phone and messaging apps. They also claimed her husband had hidden the fact that he could not father a child and suffered from mental illness.
However, the division bench of justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Sanjay Deshmukh noted that some of the allegations appeared exaggerated and that certain health-related disclosures had been made before the marriage.
'When relationships get strained, exaggerations are made,' the court observed, adding that the claims did not meet the legal threshold for cruelty under Section 498-A.
'Making annoying statements that the informant was not wearing proper clothes or was unable to cook food properly cannot be said to be acts of grave cruelty or harassment,' the bench said, quashing the criminal proceedings against the husband and his family.
In a similar ruling late last month, the high court's principal bench in Mumbai had acquitted a man convicted 27 years ago for abetment to suicide, holding that taunting a wife over her complexion or criticising her cooking were domestic quarrels, not criminal cruelty.