Husband’s relatives are often booked under Section 498A IPC cases without any evidence: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court recently said that the family members of husband are often implicated in cases of cruelty to wife under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) though there is no evidence against them. .Justice CM Joshi, while expressing concern over the misuse of Section 498A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty), said minor differences between couples were leading to court cases.“It is pertinent to note that the provisions of Section 498 of IPC are quite often misused and minor differences between the couple are being brought to the Court unnecessarily by roping in all the family members of the husband, who are staying elsewhere than the place of stay of the couple. In fact, there would not be any evidence to show that the relatives of the husband had also a role in the alleged dispute between the husband and wife,” the Court said..It added that differences between the couple may be for various reasons but the same are camouflaged for reasons “which really did not happen” so that the case comes within the purview of Section 498A.The Court made the observations while quashing proceedings against eight relatives of a man who were booked under Section 498A for cruelty to the man's wife.However, the Court upheld the proceedings against the man and his mother. .After examining the woman’s complaint, the Court noted that the allegations were mainly against the husband and her mother-in-law.Regarding others, the Court said the involvement was remote and they were not even residing at Mumbai where the couple lived.“Therefore, the involvement of accused Nos. 3 to 10 in the alleged harassment meted out to the complainant is not forthcoming either from the FIR or from the investigation papers. Such involvement of accused Nos. 3 to 10 is only in the form of omnibus allegations against them and specific details of their harassment is not narrated,” said the Court..Considering the same, the Court allowed the petition in part by quashing the proceedings against the accused, except the woman’s husband and her mother-in-law.“Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2/accused Nos. 1 and 2 shall face the trial before the trial Court,” ordered the Court..Advocate Kadloor Satyanarayanacharya represented the petitioners.Advocate Anita M Reddy represented the State.Advocate KS Ganesha represented the complainant-woman (wife).[Read Judgment]