New Delhi: Financial dominance of a husband over his estranged wife in a soured marital relationship is not an act of cruelty, the Supreme Court has said while highlighting that a criminal litigation cannot become a “gateway to settle scores and pursue personal vendettas”.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and R Mahadevan observed while quashing a criminal case lodged against an estranged husband by his wife, alleging cruelty and dowry harassment.
Setting aside a Telangana High Court verdict that had refused to quash the FIR, Justice Nagarathna said, “The monetary and financial dominance of the accused-appellant, as alleged by the complainant-respondent No.2, cannot qualify as an instance of cruelty, especially in the absence of any tangible mental or physical harm caused. “The said situation is a mirror reflection of the Indian society, where men of the households often try to dominate and take charge of the finances of the women, but criminal litigation cannot become a gateway or a tool to settle scores and pursue personal vendettas.”
Justice Nagarathna, who authored the judgment on behalf of the bench, refused to consider the act of seeking details of expenses of the money sent by the estranged husband as an act of cruelty.
“Courts have to be extremely careful and cautious in dealing with complaints and must take pragmatic realities into consideration while dealing with matrimonial cases, where the allegations have to be scrutinised with greater care and circumspection in order to prevent miscarriage of justice and abuse of process of law,” the bench observed.
The court termed the discord over the expenses as a reflection of “the daily wear and tear of marriage” and held that such actions cannot be categorised as cruelty under section 498 (subjecting a married woman to cruelty by her husband or his relatives) of the Indian Penal Code.
The bench said after a careful consideration of an earlier judicial dictum, none of the offences alleged against the accused husband is made out.
“In fact, we find that the allegations of cruelty, mental harassment and voluntarily causing hurt against the accused-appellant herein have been made with a mala-fide intent with vague and general allegations,” the court said in its December 19 order.
The verdict came on an appeal filed by the husband against the April 27, 2023 order of the high court refusing to quash the FIR against him and his family members.
The apex court clarified that the observations made in the verdict shall not come in the way of any matrimonial or other proceedings pending between the parties, which shall be decided on their own merits and in accordance with law.
PTI
