Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court recently quashed proceedings against a husband filed by his wife under section 498A (subjecting a wife to cruelty by husband or relative of husband) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), observing that the dispute is with regard to the sexual incompatibility of the parties for which the case has been lodged.
Justice Anish Kumar Gupta, while ordering to quash the First Information Report (FIR), chargesheet and proceedings arising from the FIR, said, “From the close scrutiny of the FIR as well as statement of the witnesses it is apparent that the dispute is with regard to the sexual incompatibility of the parties for which the dispute was there between the parties and due to the said dispute the instant FIR has been lodged by the opposite party no.2 (father of the wife), making out the false and concocted allegations with regard to the demand of dowry, torture and harassment.”
By no stretch of imagination it can be said to be an offence of cruelty in terms of section 498A IPC: High Court
The High Court further said, “If man would not demand sexual favour from his own wife and vice-versa, where they will go to satisfy their physical sexual urges in a morally civilized society. In any of the event, no injury has ever been sustained by the opposite party no.3 (wife). Thus, from the facts of the case, in the considered opinion of this court, by no stretch of imagination it can be said to be an offence of cruelty in terms of section 498A IPC. There is no avernment with regard to any specific demand of dowry made by any specific person except the general and vague allegations.”
Father of the wife lodged complaint against son-in-law
The father of the wife had lodged a complaint against his son-in-law and his family members for demanding dowry after the marriage in the name of various customs and cruelty meted out to his daughter for demand of dowry. It was alleged in the FIR that the husband used to drink and also used to watch porn films and used to insist for unnatural sex with his wife and used to be nude before her and also used to masturbate. It was further stated that when the wife used to object to the same, he did not pay any heed to her objections and that he, under the influence of alcohol and drugs, tried to kill his wife and strangled her. It was further stated that when the wife objected, the husband left her with her in-laws and went alone Singapore and when she later went to Singapore, she was again tortured by her husband.
Prosecution of applicants is unwanted and is just a malicious prosecution: Counsel representing husband and his relatives
The counsel representing the husband and other family members submitted that in the entire FIR as well as in the statements of the father of the wife, there are only general and vague allegations with regard to the demand of dowry and no specific incident as to who actually and when demanded such dowry has been made out either in the FIR or in the statement of witnesses and for want of any specific allegation, merely on general and vague allegations, the prosecution of the applicants is unwanted and is just a malicious prosecution.
No specific allegation, only general and vague allegations have been made out: High Court
The High Court, after hearing submissions, noted that in the entire FIR as well as in the statements of witnesses recorded during the investigation no specific allegation has been made out against the applicants and only general and vague allegations have been made out with regard to the demand and torture for demand of dowry. It further noted that from the close scrutiny of the FIR as well as the statement of the victim, the torture or any assault, if any, is meted out not for any demand of dowry but on refusal of the wife to fulfil the sexual urges of the husband. The High Court further noted that it has been categorically stated in the FIR that prior to marriage there was no demand of dowry by the applicants at any stage and that there is not a single allegation against the relatives of the husband.
“In the considered opinion of this Court the instant FIR is nothing but a concocted story of demand of dowry by making general and vague allegations against the applicants herein,” the High Court said while quashed the FIR, chargesheet and entire proceedings against the husband and his relatives.
