Karnataka HC says not having sex is cruelty under Hindu Marriage Act
Not having a physical relationship after marriage does not constitute cruelty under Indian Penal Code, but does constitute cruelty under Hindu Marriage Act, said the Karnataka High Court, while dismissing a criminal case against a man and his parents on Monday.
The case was filed by the man’s wife in 2020 under IPC section 498A and section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
What is the case?
The couple got married in December 2019 and stayed together for only 28 days. The wife filed a lawsuit in February 2020. Though the complaint included the in-laws, the wife’s main complaint was directed at her husband, a Brahmakumari devotee.
The charges
According to the complainant, her husband would constantly watch videos of a Brahmakumari sister.
He would also tell his wife that he was not interested in physical relationships and that love should be soul-to-soul love rather than physical love.
The in-laws, on the other hand, were accused of demanding dowry at the time of marriage and instigating their son.
In similar proceedings, on the petition filed by the wife, the family court had passed the decree, annulling the marriage. The high court pointed out that the decree was based on the husband’s lack of physical relationship with the wife. The husband and his parents petitioned the high court, challenging the proceedings for offences under IPC section 498A and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Section 498A of the IPC says that whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects a woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to a fine.
Meanwhile, Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act states that if any person demands, directly or indirectly, from the parents or other relatives or guardian of a bride or bridegroom, as the case may be, any dowry, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to Rs 10,000.
What did the court say?
The high court noted that the parents did not stay with the couple.
The court further observed that in those 28 days that the couple lived together, neither the complainant’s wife nor the chargesheet narrated any factum/incident that would become an ingredient of IPC section 498A.
The only complaint, according to Justice M Nagaprasanna, was that the husband never intended to have a physical relationship with his wife.
“This would undoubtedly amount to cruelty due to non-consummation of marriage under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act and not cruelty as is defined under Section 498A of the IPC. It is on the basis of such cruelty a decree of divorce is granted to the complainant and on the same basis, criminal proceedings cannot be permitted to be continued,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.