{"id":1039,"date":"2025-10-30T15:52:41","date_gmt":"2025-10-30T10:22:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shoneekapoor.com\/legal-news\/?p=1039"},"modified":"2025-10-30T15:32:13","modified_gmt":"2025-10-30T10:02:13","slug":"court-frees-husband-in-498a-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shoneekapoor.com\/legal-news\/court-frees-husband-in-498a-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Bombay High Court Frees Husband & In-Laws in 498A Case: “Saying Wife Can\u2019t Cook or Dress Well Isn\u2019t Cruelty”"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Bombay High Court frees husband and quashed a 498A case against a husband and his family, ruling that minor remarks about a wife\u2019s cooking or dressing do not amount to \u201ccruelty.\u201d The court observed that such allegations were exaggerated and lacked evidence.<\/em><\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Bombay High Court Frees Husband: The Bombay High Court at Aurangabad Bench<\/strong> recently ruled that casual or annoying remarks about a wife\u2019s cooking or clothing do not amount to \u201ccruelty\u201d under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case was heard by a division bench of Justice Vibha Kankanwadi<\/strong> and Justice Sanjay A. Deshmukh<\/strong>, who quashed criminal proceedings against the husband, Tushar Sampat Mane<\/strong>, and his family members.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The court stated clearly:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cMaking annoying statements that informant was not wearing proper clothes, was not able to cook food properly, cannot be said to be acts of grave cruelty or harassment.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Background of the Case<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The complainant, Bhagyashree Tushar Mane<\/strong>, married Tushar Mane in March 2022<\/strong>. It was her second marriage<\/strong>, following a divorce by mutual consent<\/a> in 2013.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to her complaint, the relationship was cordial for about a month after marriage, after which disputes began. She alleged that her husband\u2019s mental health issues were hidden from her before marriage, that he was under psychological treatment<\/strong>, and that his family members harassed her mentally and physically.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

She further claimed that her in-laws insulted her for not bringing gifts, demanded \u20b915 lakh during Diwali<\/strong> to purchase a flat, and finally drove her out of the house in June 2023<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Husband\u2019s and Family\u2019s Defense<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The husband and his family denied all allegations and sought to quash the FIR<\/strong> registered at Pundlik Nagar Police Station, Aurangabad<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Their counsel argued that the allegations were general, exaggerated, and lacked any evidence<\/strong>. The defense also pointed out that chat records<\/strong> showed the wife was aware of the husband\u2019s medical treatment before the marriage<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Court examined these records and observed:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cWhen the relationship gets strained, it appears that exaggerations are made.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The bench noted that the chats between the couple, exchanged before marriage, revealed that the husband had openly mentioned the medicines he was taking. Therefore, the wife could not claim ignorance about his health condition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The judges remarked:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cWhen everything was disclosed prior to the marriage and allegations are omnibus or of not so grave for befitting in the concept of cruelty contemplated under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, it would be an abuse of process of law if the applicants are asked to face the trial.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Observations by the Court<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The High Court highlighted that for any act to amount to cruelty under Section 498A IPC<\/strong>, it must fall within the meaning of the legal \u201cExplanation\u201d under the provision:<\/p>\n\n\n\n