In an unusual legal battle that reached the Karnataka High Court, a woman had filed a complaint against her husband for prohibiting her from consuming junk food, specifically after their child’s birth. The case, which could be seen as trivial by some, highlights the nuances of personal and legal boundaries within marital relationships.
The complainant, whose name has been withheld, accused her husband under IPC Section 498A of cruelty, for not allowing her to eat French fries and other junk food items. During the court proceedings, Justice M. Nag Prasanna remarked that such complaints are of a “very low level” and do not constitute legal cruelty.
The woman alleged that her dietary choices were restricted by her husband postpartum, prompting her to seek legal redress. The court, upon hearing the case, expressed that ordering an investigation against the husband over such a matter would be an abuse of legal process.
Justice Prasanna, after the hearing, issued an interim order halting all ongoing investigations against the husband and even allowed him permission to travel abroad, contingent upon submitting an affidavit. The husband, in his defense, stated he would cooperate fully with any ongoing legal processes and detailed his side of the domestic situation. He described a relationship dynamic where, during a six-year stint in the USA, his wife had imposed all household responsibilities on him while she engaged primarily with her mobile phone and Pakistani serials.
Also Read
The court ultimately dismissed the case against the husband and also halted any further investigation against his family, who were also implicated by the wife. This decision underscores the judiciary’s stance on not overstepping into personal marital matters unless they clearly violate legal boundaries.
