In-laws as passive spectators, can't be roped into 'cruelty to wife' FIR, says Bombay high court

MUMBAI: Bombay high court quashed a criminal case and proceedings against in-laws of a woman, observing that to not react, or a refusal to actively take sides of daughter-in-law or being a passive spectator, cannot be the basis to invoke the law for offence of ‘cruelty to wife’.“A parent or relative, caught between the crossfire of allegations by and between two adults in a relationship of marriage, and who chooses to remain quiet, cannot be roped in an offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC),’’ said Justice R R Bhonsale in a May 8 judgment. The offence of cruelty to wife attracts up to three years’ imprisonment. The cruelty has to be a wilful act intended to drive a woman to commit suicide or inflict grave injury to life, limb or health, as envisaged under Section 498A of the IPC and none other, the HC observed. As said by the apex court, “pragmatic realities’’ must be factored in when dealing with matrimonial disputes, HC noted.A 26-year-old woman had in July 2022, within six months of marriage, lodged an IPC section 498A First Information Report (FIR) with the Kamothe police in Navi Mumbai. The accused were her husband, 31,parents-in-law, brother-in-law and sister-in-law.She and her husband were caught in a marital discord and in March 2025 referred by the high court for mediation. The mediation failed. The FIR alleged ill-treatment, abuse and assault by husband and in-laws, not being allowed her phone over doubts raised by husband and not being allowed to visit her parents, forced to do all domestic chores, forced to watch adult content by her husband and her in-laws kept all her gold ornaments when she decided to leave the marital home.Her husband and her in-laws had petitioned the HC for quashing the FIR. The family instructed their lawyer to seek relief only for the in-laws, not husband, arguing that the case was vague. The wife’s lawyer said it was the husband’s second marriage and in 2021 a similar cruelty case filed by first wife was dropped only after a compromise.The HC on hearing all lawyers, including for the wife and State said the allegations against parents-in-law and her brother and sister-in-law were “Bald, sweeping allegations which are unsupported by credible material cannot be the basis to invoke the provisions of Section 498A of the IPC. ‘’ Against the in-law, “what is alleged are some disagreements or a difference in a point of view in the normal course of living as a family’’ Justice Bhonsale held, quashing the FIR against four as a “sheer abuse and misuse’’ of legal process to rope in husband’s kin in “vague and omnibus allegations.’’The HC directed that the criminal case against the husband would continue.The HC judgment cited various Supreme Court rulings on the law. In one the SC had noted, “We have to keep in mind that in the context of matrimonial disputes, emotions run high, and as such in the complaints filed alleging harassment or domestic violence, there may be a tendency to implicate other members of the family who do not come to the rescue of the complainant or remain mute spectators to any alleged incident of harassment, which in our view cannot by itself constitute a criminal act without there being specific acts attributed to them. Further, when tempers run high and relationships turn bitter, there is also a propensity to exaggerate the allegations, which does not necessarily mean that such domestic disputes should be given the colour of criminality.’’WHAT HC SAID: One needs to be extremely cautious, act with care, and consider ground realities which prima facie emerge. As observed by the Supreme Court, on many occasions allegations are made against relatives close and distant, who live in different cities, sometimes abroad and who visit or meet the parties on rare occasions, at weddings or social/festive gatherings. Such cases, have a different intent, motive and objective. In some cases, for various reasons, allegations of section 498A IPC are made immediately or shortly after the marriage and criminal prosecutions initiated. Such cases, require more scrutiny and are to be handled with greater care and caution. Generally, relatives are accused, based on general, vague and omnibus allegation, without any details of specific instances of their involvement in the alleged crime.