Sisters-in-law taunting woman for not conceiving child is not cruelty: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently observed that a marital cruelty case under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) will not stand against the sisters-in-law of a woman, merely on allegations that they taunted the married woman for not being able to conceive a child. .A Bench of Justice Harinath N proceeded to quash criminal charges filed under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act against two women who were accused of making such taunts against their brother's wife. "Taunting on the ground of not being able to conceive cannot be taken as sufficient grounds for continuation of proceedings against petitioners 3 and 4 (sisters-in-law) under Section 498-A IPC and Section 3 and 4 of DP Act," the Court said. .The Court also took note of arguments that after the complainant-woman's marriage, the sisters-in-law had stayed away from her marital home.“The petitioners 3 and 4 (sisters-in-law), soon after their marriage, were staying away and as such could not have resorted to any harassment to the third respondent (complainant) and the allegations against the petitioners 3 and 4 cannot be considered as sufficient for punishing them for the of offences under Section 498A of IPC and 3 and 4 of DP Act," it noted. The only allegation against the sisters-in-law was that they used to taunt the complainant for not being able to conceive a child whenever they came down for a visit. However, the Court held that these allegations are not enough to sustain a criminal case. “Such vague allegations without any specific details as to on what date and when the said taunting was resorted to by (the sisters-in-law) cannot sustain the scrutiny of law," the Court said. .The Court was hearing a plea filed by the parents and sisters (petitioners) of a man, all of whom were accused of marital cruelty and dowry harassment by the man's wife. The petitioners claimed that they had no role in the couple’s marital issues. The Court eventually granted relief to the sisters-in-law, opining that they had been unnecessarily dragged into the case by the complainant to wreak vengeance against her husband. "This case is another where the unconnected relatives of the first accused are roped in as accused only for wreaking out vengeance against the first accused," the Court said. However, the case against the parents-in-law of the complainant has not been quashed. .Advocate ML Neelima appeared for the petitioners.Advocate Tota Tejeswara Rao appeared for the respondent side. .[Read Order]