Bombay HC Quashes FIR Against Woman In Inter-Caste Marriage Harassment Case, Rules Divorce Threat Not Cruelty Under Section 498-A IPC

Mumbai: The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court recently quashed an FIR against a woman accused of harassing her sister-in-law, observing that a mere reference to divorce or remarriage with a woman from a higher caste does not amount to cruelty under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Sanjay Deshmukh was hearing a petition filed by the husband, his parents and his sister seeking quashing of the FIR filed by his wife under the provisions of the IPC and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

While the court expressed its disinclination to grant relief to the husband and his parents, their counsel withdrew the petition. The court, however, continued to hear the matter with respect to the sister-in-law, noting that the allegations against her were vague and lacked specific details.

The woman had alleged that her in-laws disapproved of her inter-caste marriage and harassed her for belonging to a Scheduled Caste. The FIR claimed that the sister-in-law had told her, “we will get him married to someone from a higher caste and arrange for divorce.”

However, the court held that such statements do not amount to cruelty under the law. “Saying such words like to take divorce and we will perform marriage with the girl of higher caste, do not establish the cruelty as there is no demand of money, dowry or cruelty driving her to commit suicide as per Section 498-A of the IPC,” the court observed.

It further said, “In the entire report, it is not specifically stated as to when the applicant abused the informant on caste. She insisted her for the divorce, which certainly is not cruelty as contemplated by Section 498-A.”

The court also noted that forcing the sister-in-law to face trial despite vague and non-specific allegations would amount to an “abuse of the process of law”. Accordingly, the HC quashed the proceedings against the sister-in-law.