Karnataka HC: Second Wife Can't File Cruelty Case Against Husband

The Karnataka High Court observed that a complaint under Section 498-A (cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code, filed by the second wife against the husband and her in-laws, is "not maintainable."

Justice S. Rachaiah allowed the petition filed by Kantharaju, setting aside the conviction order passed by the trial court and the revision court, which convicted him for Section 498-A based on the complaint filed by his second wife.

Second Wife Can't File Cruelty Case: Karnataka HC

The bench noted that the prosecution had to establish that the complainant was the legally wedded wife. Unless that is established, the court will consider her the second wife, and obviously, the complaint filed under Section 498-A cannot be entertained.

The woman claimed that she was affected by paralysis after a few years of marriage, after which the man began harassing and subjecting her to cruelty and emotional abuse. She alleged that she was kicked out of the matrimonial home and that the man had threatened to set her ablaze.

The man, on the other hand, argued that since she was his second wife, she could not file a complaint against Section 498-A and that both courts had committed an error by disregarding that aspect.

The woman’s prosecution countered this by stating that witness evidence proved that the woman was harassed, threatened, and mistreated by the man.

The bench noted that according to the provisions of 498–A woman in the definition refers to the legally wedded wife, and according to the evidence, the woman was his second wife.

Thus, the court held that the complaint filed by the second wife against the husband and the in-laws was not maintainable. Further, it was noted that the lower courts had committed an error by applying the provisions of the law in this aspect; hence, the Karnataka high court was intervening to make the necessary revision.

Further, the court cited the Supreme Court judgement in the case of Shivcharan Lal Verma & Another v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2007).

How does that matter when the woman's safety is at stake?

However, isn’t domestic violence still cruelty regardless of whether the woman is a man’s first or second wife? Does being the second wife mean the abuse hurts less? Women are raised to be subservient to men. The fear of being blamed, shamed, and criticised for not being the "ideal wife" often discourages women from opening up about abusive relationships.

Most women don’t even take domestic issues outside the home unless and until they are desperately in need of help and support. Seeking the help of the court is often the last resort, considering the aftermath women have to face. Life wouldn’t be easy if a woman’s name went to the police station or court. Dealing with a legal battle while under social and media scrutiny is definitely not something women would want. With that being the case, when a woman seeks legal help despite knowing how taxing the process can be, why is she being denied a chance to be treated fairly?

So what if she isn’t legally married to the man? She could be his first wife, second wife, or live-in partner; why should that matter when her safety is at stake? Shouldn’t the law be protecting her instead of distinguishing her based on her marital status?

Given that only a few women muster the courage to raise their voices against the violence against them, don't, they deserve to receive the necessary legal support? We live in a society where people adhere to the law more than they stick to their moral conscience. So, if the law won’t empower women against abuse, who will? If these loopholes in the law remain in place, won't men take advantage of them to continue to abuse women?

Suggested Reading: Wife Entitled To Maintenance Even If Marriage Not Legal: Madras HC

Views expressed by the author are their own