One incident of husband slapping wife for overstaying at her parents’ home not cruelty: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court recently held that a single incident of a husband slapping his wife does not amount to the offence of marital cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) [Dilipbhai Manglabhai Varli vs. State of Gujarat].

Justice Gita Gopi made the observation while acquitting a man in a case where he had earlier been convicted for being cruel to his wife and driving her to die by suicide.

Referring to the marital cruelty allegations, the judge noted that only one incident of slapping his wife for staying overnight at her parental home without informing him cannot be elevated to criminal cruelty.

“One incident of husband slapping the wife on the ground of staying overnight at parental home without informing him would not be counted as cruelty," the February 5 order reads.

Just Gopi further observed that although there were allegations of continued beatings, no prior complaint had ever been filed with the police or before any community elders. There was also no documentary proof of medical treatment for injuries allegedly caused by such beatings.

The Court proceeded to allow a criminal appeal filed by the accused man, challenging his 2003 conviction by a Sessions Court in Valsad for the offences under Sections 498A (cruelty) and 306 (abetment of suicide) of the IPC.

The case dates back to May 1996. The deceased, one Premila, had been married to the appellant, Dilip, for about one year. On May 11, 1996, she was found hanging from a tree in her husband’s field at Sarigam village.

Premila's father lodged a complaint alleging that Dilip used to beat and harass her and that such cruelty had driven her to commit suicide.

Based on this, Dilip was charged under Sections 498A and 306 IPC. In 2003, the Sessions Court convicted him and sentenced him to one year of rigorous imprisonment for the offence of cruelty and seven years for the offence of abetment of suicide.

Dilip challenged this conviction before the High Court.

The prosecution’s case rested largely on the statements of Premila’s father, mother, brother and aunt.

They claimed that Dilip used to return home late at night after playing the banjo at wedding functions for extra income, and that this led to quarrels between the couple. They also spoke of beatings and harassment.

The High Court closely examined the evidence on record. It noted that the marriage had lasted about a year and that there were no allegations of dowry demand. The main source of dispute appeared to be that Premila did not like Dilip going out at night to play music and returning late.

The Court noted that apart from the one incident of Dilip slapping Premila for overstaying at her parents' home without informing him, the prosecution failed to highlight any other incident to prove persistent, unbearable cruelty.

It held that such an isolated incident could not be treated as cruelty of the nature contemplated under Section 498A IPC.

The Court also found that there was no evidence of any proximate cause linking Dilip's conduct to the suicide. The prosecution failed to prove that there was any quarrel on the day prior to the incident that could have directly led to the suicide.

The High Court concluded that the disputes between the couple were ordinary marital quarrels.

It noted that such quarrels cannot stand a conviction under cruelty or abetment to suicide. It further observed that persistent and unbearable beatings would require cogent evidence. In the absence of such proof, the conviction stood vitiated.

Accordingly, the High Court set aside Dilip's conviction.

Senior Advocate Dhaval Vyas with Advocates Yukta Pandey and DA Sankesara represented the appellant.

Additional Public Prosecutor Jyoti Bhatt represented the State.

[Read Judgement]