The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a woman accused of cruelty and caste-based abuse by her sister-in-law, holding that her remarks suggesting divorce and remarriage with a girl from a higher caste do not constitute cruelty under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.
The Bench comprising Justice Sanjay A. Deshmukh and Justice Vibha Kankanwadi delivered the judgment in Criminal Application No. 2998 of 2023, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petition sought quashing of proceedings in Special Case No. 273 of 2023 arising from FIR No. 134 of 2023 registered at Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad, which invoked Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 IPC, along with Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Background
The informant, Aishwarya Patil, alleged that after her inter-caste marriage to Ameykumar Patil in May 2021, she was subjected to continuous harassment, abuse, and caste-based discrimination by her husband and his family members, including her sister-in-law (Applicant No. 4).
Among various allegations, the informant claimed that her mother-in-law had asked her to terminate her pregnancy, citing caste reasons, and that she was physically assaulted by her husband, who allegedly kicked her and made derogatory remarks about her caste. The informant also alleged threats of divorce and statements that the husband would marry a girl of higher caste.
Court’s Observations
While the court allowed the withdrawal of the application in respect of Applicant Nos. 1 to 3 (husband and in-laws), it proceeded to evaluate the claims against Applicant No. 4 (Apurva Nitinchandra Patil), the sister-in-law.
The court noted that although the applicant was named in the FIR, there were no specific allegations of caste-based abuse or acts of cruelty that would attract the rigours of the charges under Section 498-A IPC or the SC/ST Act.
Referring to the statements in the FIR, the Bench observed:
“Saying such words like to take divorce and we will perform marriage with the girl of higher caste, do not establish the cruelty as there is no demand of money, dowry or cruelty driving her to commit suicide as per Section 498-A of the IPC.”
The court further emphasized that insisting on divorce or suggesting remarriage does not constitute cruelty under the legal definition in the absence of specific acts such as dowry demands or abetment of suicide.
Decision
Invoking its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, the court ruled that continuation of proceedings against Applicant No. 4 would amount to abuse of process of law.
Accordingly, the Court passed the following order:
“The proceedings in Special Case No. 273 of 2023… stand quashed to the extent of applicant No.4 (Apurva Nitinchandra Patil) only.”
The application against Applicant Nos. 1 to 3 was dismissed as withdrawn.
