Section 498A often misused to pressurise husband's family: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court recently quashed a case of cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) initiated against a woman by her brother's wife [Biswaroopa Pati @ Mohanty v State of Odisha]..Justice G Satapathy quashed the proceedings against the sister-in-law stating that the offence of cruelty to wife under Section 498A is often being misused against parents-in-law to pressurise the family of the husband. "It is, however, clear that the offence of dowry torture U/S. 498-A of IPC has often being misused against the in-laws to pressurize the family of the husband and there is a tendency of over implication of relatives of the husband who often reside in separate mess or even at a distant place than the matrimonial home of the bride," the Court said. .The single-judge went on to discuss the Court's duty in such situations to check the over implication of the husband's relatives."It is also true that there are some genuine cases of dowry torture in which the mother-in-law and sister-in-law play vital role, apart from the errant husband and other in-laws and the Court has to be very careful while dealing with matter concerning matrimonial disputes between husband and wife to separate genuine case from cases of over implication and vexatious cases," the Court said..The Court also expressed its concern over cruelty cases being filed in the heat of passion over trivial issues..In the present case, the sister-in-law (petitioner) moved the High Court seeking quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against her by her brother's wife who claimed she was subjected to mental and physical torture by her husband and other in-laws for demand of more dowry.The petitioner submitted that no offence was made out against her and there were only some general and unspecific allegations. She also informed the Court that being married, she was residing in a separate house. .The Court agreed that a married woman normally resides in her matrimonial home unless she has matrimonial disputes with her in-laws.It was further recorded that there was no allegation about the petitioner's dispute with her in-laws. Thus, it was found that the criminal proceedings against the petitioner were required to be quashed..Senior advocate G Mishra appeared for the petitioner, while government advocate SS Pradhan represented the State and advocate B Pujari appeared for the complainant..[Read Judgment]