Delhi HC says mere taunts by husband’s distant relatives don’t amount to cruelty against wife

In this case, the woman’s nephew married in November 2023, but his wife later complained to him and his family members, including the woman, accusing them of interference in her personal matters and of subjecting her to harassment and assault

New Delhi

The woman, in her petition before the high court, asserted that the allegations were vague, frivolous and generic in nature and were not supported by evidence. (HT Archive)

Mere taunts, casual remarks, vague allegations, or ordinary family disputes involving a husband’s distant relatives do not amount to cruelty against a woman, the Delhi High Court has held, as it quashed criminal proceedings against a man’s extended family members.

A bench of justice Amit Mahajan delivered the verdict on Monday, while dealing with a petition filed by a woman and her daughter seeking to quash a case registered by her nephew’s wife under various sections of Indian Penal Code, including sections 498A (husband or relative of a husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty), and 406 (criminal breach of trust).

In this case, the woman’s nephew married in November 2023, but his wife later complained to him and his family members, including the woman, accusing them of interference in her personal matters and of subjecting her to harassment and assault over dowry demands.

The woman, in her petition before the high court, asserted that the allegations were vague, frivolous and generic in nature and were not supported by evidence. It was further submitted that she was only a distant relative of the man, had been wrongly implicated in the case without substantive involvement and did not even reside with them during their marriage.

The Delhi Police opposed the petition, arguing that the case was at the stage of framing charges and that the complainant had specifically named the petitioner in the FIR. They contended that any intervention by the court at this stage would hinder the prosecution’s case.

Ruling in the woman’s favour, the court said, “However, mere taunts, casual references, vague assertions or general family friction that occur in the ordinary wear and tear of marital life are not sufficient to fall within the definition of ‘cruelty’ as embodied under Section 498A of the IPC.”

The court, in its verdict, also expressed concern regarding the growing trend of roping in the husband’s distant relatives in dowry cases, in the absence of evidence.

“However, as observed by courts in a plethora of judgments, there has been a growing tendency to rope in even distant relatives of husbands being uncles, aunts, extended family members - who do not even reside at the matrimonial house of the woman and even in the dearth of evidence to highlight their active involvement in the alleged acts of cruelty solely for the reason that such relatives may have been privy to the matrimonial acrimony of the parties. Such omnibus, sweeping and mechanical implication, however, bereft of concrete evidence, dilutes the very intent and sanctity with which the provision was incorporated,” the court maintained.