The Supreme Court on Tuesday voiced serious concern over the increasing misuse of legal provisions related to dowry harassment and cruelty by wives against the family members of husbands, including elderly parents and distant relatives, in matrimonial disputes.
A bench comprising Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma, while hearing an appeal against an Allahabad High Court order convicting a man under dowry-related offences, said, “The term cruelty is subject to rather cruel misuse by the parties and cannot be established simpliciter without specific instances, to say the least.”
The judgment, authored by Justice Sharma, highlighted that vague, unsubstantiated allegations weaken prosecution cases and cast “serious suspicion on the viability of the version of a complainant.”
The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant of charges under Section 498A (cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The bench expressed distress over the “growing tendency” of complainant wives to indiscriminately implicate not only the husband but also aged parents, distant relatives, and even married sisters living separately.
The verdict underscored that such sweeping accusations vitiate the spirit of protective legislation meant to safeguard genuine victims. “We cannot ignore the missing specifics in a criminal complaint, which is the premise of invoking criminal machinery of the state,” the court observed.
The case stemmed from a December 1999 complaint by a woman alleging mental and physical abuse, dowry demands, and cruelty in a marriage that lasted barely a year. The woman claimed she had suffered physical assault, was pressured to resign from her job, was administered laced drinks, and was humiliated at social gatherings.
However, the court noted that beyond the testimonies of the woman and her father, there was no independent or documentary evidence to corroborate the claims. It also remarked on the absence of medical records to support the allegation of a miscarriage due to physical assault.
Significantly, the FIR was filed nearly a year after the husband had initiated divorce proceedings, raising concerns about the timing and intention behind the criminal complaint.
The Supreme Court concluded that criminal convictions cannot be based on broad or generalized claims without specific details or corroborative evidence. It further noted that the couple’s marriage had since been legally dissolved and that further prosecution would amount to “an abuse of process of law.”
Setting aside the Allahabad High Court’s 2018 order, the bench allowed the appeal and acquitted the husband of all charges.
