New Delhi, The Delhi High Court has said Section 498A of the IPC was enacted to address the plight of women suffering various forms of cruelty and not just physical abuse, and making hospitalisation a prerequisite for invoking it would erode its very purpose.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said cruelty included mental, emotional, and financial abuse, and a mandatory hospitalisation would close the doors of justice for countless women who endure abuse behind closed doors.
The court made the observation while dismissing a man's plea seeking anticipatory bail in a case by his estranged wife over alleged cruelty and dowry demand.
The husband said the present case was a case of normal "wear-and-tear" in marriage and not one where the complainant was found in a hospital.
Calling his argument "unmerited", the court said such a narrow interpretation, which required a woman to be hospitalised to allege cruelty, would render the provision ineffective, silencing many victims and perpetuating cycles of abuse.
"Allowing such an argument to prevail – that hospitalisation is a prerequisite for invoking Section 498A – would erode the very purpose of the provision. Section 498A of IPC was enacted to address the plight of women who suffer various forms of cruelty, not just physical abuse that results in visible injuries," it said on January 14.
The court further observed if such an ideology was allowed to grow, it would shut doors of justice for countless women who endured abuse behind closed doors, leaving them trapped in a distressing and oppressive environment.
{{/usCountry}}The court further observed if such an ideology was allowed to grow, it would shut doors of justice for countless women who endured abuse behind closed doors, leaving them trapped in a distressing and oppressive environment.
{{/usCountry}}"Such a perspective fails to recognise the multifaceted nature of cruelty, which includes mental, emotional, and financial abuse, all of which are equally detrimental and fall within the ambit of Section 498A," it added.
The court said in the present case, the complaint was of a "serious and distressing nature" as it alleged the accused not only subjected his wife to severe harassment and mental trauma but also retained her jewellery and other personal belongings.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.