Husband’s Girlfriend Is Not A ‘Relative’ Under Section 85 BNS: Karnataka HC Quashes Wife’s Cruelty Case Against Her

BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a woman accused of being the husband’s alleged girlfriend, holding that she cannot be treated as a “relative of the husband” for prosecution for cruelty under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the order while allowing Criminal Petition No. 9264 of 2026. The case arose from Crime No. 22/2026 registered by Central Women Police Station, Bengaluru. The petitioner had been arrayed as Accused No. 4.

The FIR invoked Sections 74, 85, 352 and 351(2), read with Section 3(5) of the BNS, along with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking quashing of the case against her.

According to the order, Accused No. 1 and the complainant are husband and wife and were involved in a matrimonial dispute. The petitioner was brought into the criminal case on the allegation that she was the husband’s alleged paramour and was responsible for the relationship between the husband and wife breaking down. The allegation against her also included criminal intimidation of the wife.

Read Also:- False 498A – 85 BNS Fear And Need Legal Help? The Law Changed, The Risk Remains, The Defence Must Change Too

The High Court examined whether an alleged girlfriend or paramour of a husband could be prosecuted for cruelty under Section 85 BNS. The Court held that the settled legal position did not permit such a person to fall within the scope of the provision merely because of an alleged relationship with the husband.

The Court observed:

“The offence alleged against the petitioner is the one punishable under Section 85 of the BNS, inter alia, for which the petitioner cannot be drawn into the web of the proceedings, in the light of the settled principle of law that a paramour cannot be a member of the family and tried for the said offence.”

The High Court relied upon the Supreme Court judgment in Dechamma I.M. @ Dechamma Koushik v. State of Karnataka and Another, reported as 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3853. The Supreme Court had considered whether a girlfriend or a woman having a romantic or sexual relationship with a married man could be treated as a “relative of the husband” for prosecution under the earlier Section 498A IPC.

The Supreme Court had held:

“18. By no stretch of imagination would a girlfriend or even a concubine in an etymological sense be a “relative”. The word “relative” brings within its purview a status. Such a status must be conferred by blood, marriage, or adoption. If no marriage has taken place, the question of one being relative of another would not arise.”

It further observed:

“It could thus be seen that this Court has, in unequivocal terms, held that a girlfriend or even a woman with whom a man has had romantic or sexual relations outside of marriage could not be construed to be a relative.”

The Supreme Court also explained that, under Section 498A IPC, the material must show ill-treatment by the husband or his relatives connected with non-fulfilment of a dowry demand. On the facts before it, it found no material showing that the concerned woman had caused such harassment and held that continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to an “abuse of process of law.”

Applying this principle, the Karnataka High Court held:

“In the light of the bedrock of the law elucidated by the Apex Court, if the facts obtaining in the case at hand are observed, a paramour of the husband - accused No.1 cannot be termed as a relative of the husband.”

Importantly, the High Court did not stop only at Section 85 BNS. It also examined the other offences alleged against the petitioner and found that, when tested against the allegations in the complaint, none of their ingredients was made out against her.

The Court therefore allowed the criminal petition and quashed Crime No. 22/2026 against the petitioner alone, including proceedings under Sections 74, 85, 352, 351(2) read with Section 3(5) BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The proceedings against the other accused were not quashed by this order.

Read Also:- Work-From-Home Doesn’t Make You a Better Parent: Supreme Court Upholds Child Custody in Favour of the Father

EXPLANATORY TABLE OF LAWS AND SECTIONS

CASE DETAILS

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Husband’s alleged girlfriend was dragged into a matrimonial criminal case, but Section 85 BNS could not legally apply to her as his “relative.”
• A wife’s matrimonial allegations cannot turn every person associated with the husband into an accused.
• The High Court found that none of the ingredients of the alleged offences was made out against the girlfriend.
• Criminal law cannot be expanded merely because a marriage has broken down or allegations have been made.
• The Karnataka High Court quashed the entire criminal proceedings against Accused No. 4, stopping the case against her from continuing