Mumbai: Allegations of ill-treatment by a man against his own family members do not fall within the scope and ambit of Section 498(A) [cruelty] of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Bombay High Court has observed.
The court has quashed a March 2013 FIR against two brothers, one sister and the wife of one of the brothers, filed by the third brother’s wife alleging cruelty. Interestingly, the woman did not make cruelty allegations against her husband, who is engaged in the business of construction activities and was a real estate consultant.
Section 498A of the IPC deals with the offence of current meted out to a woman by her husband and his family. The court noted that the FIR is nothing but a “shot fired by the man from his wife’s shoulder to espouse his own cause of his interest in his father’s property”.
The HC was hearing a petition filed by a father, two brothers, a sister and sister-in-law seeking quashing of the FIR against them. The case against the father was abated after his demise.
The woman had filed an FIR on March 1, 2013, with the RCF police station alleging cruelty. Terming it a “peculiar case”, the court noted that “surprisingly, these allegations … made by the complainant-wife at the behest of her own husband”.
“Although Section 498-A envisages cruelty inflicted upon a woman by a relative of the husband, it is rare to see such allegations aimed at the relatives de hors any accusation against the husband,” a bench of Justices Ajey Gadkari and Neela Gokhale said.
As per the FIR, the couple married on February 15, 2009, and soon thereafter, the family members allegedly started having petty quarrels with the intention to drive her and her husband out of the family house. She listed five jewellery items which she and her husband received as gifts during their marriage.
The couple has filed 12 and two other cases against the family members at the RCF and Worli police stations, respectively.
The family members’ advocate, Ashish Mishra, submitted that the FIR has been filed with the only object of grabbing property. He pointed out the father had filed a civil suit in which the court restrained the couple from entering their home. Also, the father had filed a private complaint against the couple in which the magistrate had initiated criminal proceedings.
Pertinently, in 2023, the father had transferred most of his assets to the family members vide a gift deed. “Undoubtedly, she [woman] has given a list of incidents of cruelty in the FIR. However, the instances are also of a nature that do not fulfil the ingredients of Section 498(A) of the IPC,” the court noted. It added: “Allegations of ill-treatment by a man against his own family members do not fall within the scope and ambit of Section 498(A) of the IPC.”
The judges highlighted that the civil litigation between the parties “lays bare the intention” and demonstrates his personal interest in settling scores with his family members in respect of the family property.
“The FIR clearly discloses a proxy litigation engaged by [third brother] through his wife, the complainant against the petitioners to settle his own property dispute,” the judges underlined adding that the main challenge by him is assailing the gift deed which “exposes his ruse and intention completely”.
Quashing the FIR, the judges said that it is “filed with an ulterior motive for wreaking personal vengeance” and is a “classic example of gross abuse of Section 498(A) of the IPC”.
