Is Making Daughter-In-Law Sleep On Carpet, Depriving Her Of TV ‘Not Severe’ For Cruelty?

The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court has overturned a 20-year-old order that convicted a man and his family. This order was based on the cruelty that the man’s late wife was facing. The court ruled out the deceased’s family’s accusation of not allowing their daughter to watch TV, forbidding her to visit the temple alone, making her sleep on the carpet, taunting the food she made, making her fetch water at midnight and verbally abusing her ‘not severe actions’ under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). 

Making Daughter-In-Law Sleep On Carpet ‘Not Severe’ For Cruelty, Says Bombay HC

According to Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), “Whoever being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend for three years and shall also be liable to fine.”

The Bombay High Court, observing the nature of the allegations revolving around domestic issues, did not reach the level of physical and mental torture. The man, his parents, and his brother were acquitted of these charges along with IPC Section 306 (abetment of suicide). 

The single judge bench of Justice Abhay S Waghwase noted that the village Varangaon, where the deceased and her in-laws lived had a water supply at 1:30 am. Usually, the families living there fetched water at midnight.

The deceased married the appellant on December 24, 2002.  She died by suicide on May 1^st 2003 by hanging. The family of the deceased lodged a complaint post her demise. Her family members reported demands for a car as dowry from the deceased’s in-laws.

The Court ruled, ‘There is no cogent and convincing evidence on record to show that accused persons subjected deceased to cruelty to meet their unlawful demand. The ill-treatment became intolerable to her and therefore she committed suicide. Such observations are out of place and are not based on a strong foundation. Here, as submitted allegations are specific, general, or petty in nature, essential ingredients for 306 IPC are also not available, and therefore, such judgment cannot be allowed to be sustained.’