Recently, Karnataka High Court quashed proceedings under Section 498A (cruelty to women) of IPC initiated against a husband by his wife for not consummating their marriage as he follows the teachings of the sisters of the Brahmakumari Samaja [Aiyappa MB v. State of Karnataka].
Justice M Nagaprasanna said that while the facts related to the case clearly indicated cruelty as a ground for divorce, criminal proceedings could not be allowed further.
The order clearly stated, “Finding no ingredient even against the husband, the proceedings if permitted to continue would degenerate into harassment, become an abuse of the process of law and ultimately result in miscarriage of justice.“
The Court further found that there was no case made against the parents-in-law either, who never even stayed with the couple.
The petitioner had moved the Court seeking quashing of the case against him for the offence of cruelty as well as other offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The marriage between the petitioner and the complainant fell apart within a very short time span as the wife only stayed in the matrimonial home for just 28 days.
Along with above mentioned case of cruelty, she also instituted an instant criminal case against the husband as well as another plea under the Hindu Marriage Act to seek annulment of marriage on the ground of cruelty. The concerned court allowed the latter in November 2022.
The petitioner argued in this case that the allegations were short of fulfilling requirements set out under Section 498A.
However, the complainant claimed that whenever she approached him, he was always engaged in watching the Brahmakumari sisters’ videos. She further claimed that her husband told her that he is not interested in a physical relationship.
There were no other allegations related to dowry was made against the husband.
Considering these facts, the Court noted that the grievances of the petitioner against her husband were trivial in nature.
The Court further added, “In matrimonial cases, the Apex Court has time and again directed that unless the offences are found albeit prima facie, such proceedings should not be permitted to continue.“
So, the petition of the husband was allowed and the criminal case was quashed against him.
Advocate MRC Manohar represented the petitioner whereas the respondents were represented by HCGP KP Yashoda and Advocate KS Karthik Kiran.
Source: https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/karnataka-high-court-quashes-498a-proceedings-husband-not-consummating-marriage