Summary:
The Allahabad High Court has refused to cancel criminal charges against a man accused under sections like 498A, 377 IPC, and the Dowry Prohibition Act—even though there was no medical evidence, no witness support, and a delay of four years in filing the FIR. The court said the case should go to trial. This decision shows how men can be forced into long legal battles based only on one-sided accusations.
Brief Facts of the Case
- A man was accused of offences under Section 498A (cruelty), Section 377 (unnatural sex), and the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- The wife filed the FIR in 2023, claiming the incidents happened back in 2019—a 4-year unexplained delay.
- She refused medical examination.
- No independent witness supported her story.
- Her statements lacked clear instances of dowry demand or ongoing threats.
Legal Provisions Involved
- Section 498A IPC – Cruelty to wife by husband/relatives.
- Section 377 IPC – Unnatural sexual acts (now being applied within marriage).
- Dowry Prohibition Act (3/4) – Dowry demand laws.
- Supreme Court rulings (e.g., Navtej Singh Johar) – Clarified consensual sexual activity between adults is not a crime.
Arguments by Both Sides
Man’s Side:
- Allegations were vague, delayed, and unsupported.
- No medical exam was conducted.
- FIR lacked clarity, and independent witnesses didn’t support the claims.
- The complaint appeared to be a misuse of criminal law after a failed marriage.
Opposite Side:
- Claimed continuous harassment justified the delay.
- Argued that FIR and statements were enough to proceed to trial.
- Dismissed the importance of lack of evidence, saying her version alone was sufficient.
What the Court Said
- The court accepted the argument that non-consensual sexual acts in marriage can be punished under Section 377 IPC.
- It disagreed with earlier High Court rulings that shielded husbands from prosecution under this section.
- Held that a wife has an individual right to refuse certain acts—even in marriage—and this cannot be overridden by the marital relationship.
- Found that the FIR and statements, though uncorroborated, were enough to continue prosecution.
Court’s Final Decision
The Court refused to quash the criminal case, pushing the man into a full criminal trial. He was, however, allowed to apply for bail.
Comments from the author of this website
This decision is a red flag for every man going through a troubled marriage. Here’s why:
- Allegations alone are enough: No evidence? No witnesses? Doesn’t matter. Just words are now being treated as proof.
- Men are presumed guilty: The burden is now on the man to prove his innocence in a system that increasingly refuses to demand facts before prosecution.
- Criminalizing private marital life: Section 377, originally meant to protect dignity and autonomy, is now being used to criminalize intimate acts within marriage—opening the door to harassment through fabricated or exaggerated claims.
- Legal weapons in divorce battles: This ruling sets a dangerous precedent where criminal law becomes a tool to gain leverage in separation or custody cases.
Bottom Line —
This is not justice. This is a warning: Men in India can now be dragged into criminal courts without any real evidence—just on the basis of a late, one-sided accusation.
When courts ignore basic fairness—like the need for proof, timely reporting, and corroboration—it signals open season on men.
The message is loud and clear: In a failed marriage, truth doesn’t matter—only the accusation does.
Read Complete Judgment Here