Forcing unnatural sex on wife, assaulting her for resisting is cruelty under Section 498A IPC: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently held that a husband who engages in unnatural sexual acts with his wife without her consent and subsequently assaults her for resisting such acts is guilty of cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)..However, the same will not amount to an offence under Section 376 (rape) or 377 (unnatural offences) of IPC, the Court said.Justice GS Ahluwalia passed the judgment while quashing the charge of unnatural sex under Section 377 of IPC against a man and upholding the charges of cruelty and assault under Sections 498 and 323 of IPC against him.“Committing unnatural sex with wife against her wishes and on her resistance, assaulting and treating her with physical cruelty will certainly fall within the definition of cruelty,” the Court said..The accused had approached the Court for quashing the entire case registered on the complaint of his wife. She has alleged that the man would engaged in unnatural sex with her after consuming liquor and whenever she refused to consent to the same, she was assaulted and treated with cruelty.Challenging the charges, the husband argued that unnatural sex with wife is not a rape as per Section 375 of IPC. It was submitted that when the basic allegation of committing unnatural sex is not an offence, then no offence under Section 498A of IPC is made out..The Court agreed that unnatural sex with a wife would not be an offence under Section 376 or 377 of IPC in view of an earlier ruling passed by the High Court.However, it opined that since there are specific allegations that whenever the wife resisted to the unnatural conduct of her husband, then she was assaulted and was treated with physical cruelty, the offence under Section 498A of IPC was made out."Accordingly, this application is partially allowed. Offence under Section 377 is hereby quashed. However, FIR in relation to offence under Section 498A and 323 of IPC is upheld," it ordered..Advocate Dr Jitendra Singh Kushwah represented the accused.Public Prosecutor Mohit Shivhare appeared for State.Advocate Vinod Kumar Dhakad represented the complainant..[Read Judgment]