PATNA: The Patna high court, in one of its recent verdicts, held that calling wife “bhoot” (ghost) and “pishach” (vampire) does not amount to cruelty in case of a failed matrimonial relations of a couple.
A single bench of justice Bibek Chaudhury, while allowing the criminal revision case of one Sahdeo Gupta and his son Naresh Kumar Gupta (both residents of Bokaro), quashed the judgment of a magisterial court of Nalanda which held the petitioners guilty of committing matrimonial cruelty under Section 498-A of the IPC and demanding dowry which is prohibited in law.
The high court also quashed the decision of additional sessions judge, Nalanda, which had upheld the verdict of the magisterial court as an appellate court.
Naresh was married to Jyoti according to Hindu rituals on March 1,1993. Next year, a complaint case was filed by Jyoti’s father Kanhaiya Lal, who accused Naresh and his father of committing physical and mental tortures on his daughter for want of a car as dowry. The high court found that there was neither any evidence nor any medical document to prove that the petitioner tortured his wife.
Justice Chaudhury, in his judgment delivered on March 22, also rejected the plea of complainant’s lawyer that addressing the wife as “bhoot” and “pishach” by a man in 21st century society amounts to mental torture.
The high court observed that in the situation of failed matrimonial relations which was evident from the records of this case, there are incidents where both the husband and wife abuse each other by using filthy language. However, all such accusations do not come within the veil of cruelty, the court observed.
A single bench of justice Bibek Chaudhury, while allowing the criminal revision case of one Sahdeo Gupta and his son Naresh Kumar Gupta (both residents of Bokaro), quashed the judgment of a magisterial court of Nalanda which held the petitioners guilty of committing matrimonial cruelty under Section 498-A of the IPC and demanding dowry which is prohibited in law.
The high court also quashed the decision of additional sessions judge, Nalanda, which had upheld the verdict of the magisterial court as an appellate court.
Naresh was married to Jyoti according to Hindu rituals on March 1,1993. Next year, a complaint case was filed by Jyoti’s father Kanhaiya Lal, who accused Naresh and his father of committing physical and mental tortures on his daughter for want of a car as dowry. The high court found that there was neither any evidence nor any medical document to prove that the petitioner tortured his wife.
Justice Chaudhury, in his judgment delivered on March 22, also rejected the plea of complainant’s lawyer that addressing the wife as “bhoot” and “pishach” by a man in 21st century society amounts to mental torture.
The high court observed that in the situation of failed matrimonial relations which was evident from the records of this case, there are incidents where both the husband and wife abuse each other by using filthy language. However, all such accusations do not come within the veil of cruelty, the court observed.
We also published the following articles recently