The Supreme Court has advised against the automatic application of the offence of domestic cruelty, as outlined in Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), in all FIRs lodged based on complaints filed by wives against their husbands and in-laws.
“In all cases, where wife complains of harassment or ill-treatment, Section 498A of the IPC cannot be applied mechanically. Every matrimonial conduct, which may cause annoyance to the other, may not amount to cruelty. Mere trivial irritations, quarrels between spouses, which happen in day-to-day married life, may also not amount to cruelty,” the Court said.
The bench, comprised of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, advised against the deployment of police resources for “holding the husband at ransom so that he could be squeezed by the wife at the instigation of her parents or relatives or friends.”
In the judgment penned by Justice JB Pardiwala, it was observed that disputes between couples frequently become more complex due to the involvement of parents and relatives.
“Many times, the parents including the close relatives of the wife make a mountain out of a mole. Instead of salvaging the situation and making all possible endeavours to save the marriage, their action either due to ignorance or on account of sheer hatred towards the husband and his family members, brings about complete destruction of marriage on trivial issues.”, the court said.
Additionally, the court emphasized the significance of tolerance, adaptation, and mutual respect between spouses within the institution of marriage.
“The foundation of a sound marriage is tolerance, adjustment and respecting one another. Tolerance to each other’s fault to a certain bearable extent has to be inherent in every marriage. Petty quibbles, trifling differences are mundane matters and should not be exaggerated and blown out of proportion to destroy what is said to have been made in the heaven. The Court must appreciate that all quarrels must be weighed from that point of view in determining what constitutes cruelty in each particular case, always keeping in view the physical and mental conditions of the parties, their character and social status.”, the court said.
