From Suspicion to Suicide: Unraveling Third-Party Liability in Marital Tragedies – A Legal Deep Dive

The Village Drama That Ended in Tragedy

In a quiet Indian village, a simple conversation between a wife and her co-villager spiraled into suspicion. The husband, troubled by what he perceived as evidence of an extramarital affair, found himself confronting not just his wife, but the co-villager as well. Tempers flared, quarrels ensued, and, overwhelmed by emotion and suspicion, the husband consumed poison—ending his own life.

Can the third person—the co-villager—be held criminally responsible for abetment of suicide under Indian law?

Decoding the Legal Labyrinth: What Does the Law Say?

Print Page

Whether suspicion of extra-marital relationship would come within ambit of cruelty U/S 498A of IPC?

The concept of mental cruelty depends upon the milieu and the strata from which the persons come from and definitely has an individualistic perception regard being had to one’s endurance and sensitivity. It is difficult to generalize but certainly it can be appreciated in a set of established facts. Extra-marital relationship, per se, or as such would not come within the ambit of Section 498-A IPC. It would be an illegal or immoral act, but other ingredients are to be brought home so that it would constitute a criminal offence. There is no denial of the fact that the cruelty need not be physical but a mental torture or abnormal behaviour that amounts to cruelty or harassment in a given case. It will depend upon the facts of the said case. To explicate, solely because the husband is involved in an extra-marital relationship and there is some suspicion in the mind of wife, that cannot be regarded as mental cruelty which would attract mental cruelty for satisfying the ingredients of Section 306 IPC.

In the instant case, as the evidence would limpidly show, the wife developed a sense of suspicion that her husband was going to the house of Ashwathamma in Village Chelur where he got involved with Deepa, the daughter of Ashwathamma. It has come on record through various witnesses that the people talked in the locality with regard to the involvement of the appellant with Deepa. It needs to be noted that Deepa, being not able to digest the humiliation, committed suicide. The mother and the brother of Deepa paved the same path. In such a situation, it is extremely difficult to hold that the prosecution has established the charge under Section 498Aand the fact that the said cruelty induced the wife to commit suicide. It is manifest that the wife was guided by the rumour that aggravated her suspicion which has no boundary. The seed of suspicion planted in mind brought the eventual tragedy. But such an event will not constitute the offence or establish the guilt of the accused-appellant under Section 306 of the IPC.

19. Having said that we intend to make it clear that if the husband gets involved in an extra-marital affair that may not in all circumstances invite conviction under Section 306 of the IPC but definitely that can be a ground for divorce or other reliefs in a matrimonial dispute under other enactments. And we so clarify.

Reportable

Supreme Court of India

K.V. Prakash Babu vs State Of Karnataka on 22 November, 2016

Bench: Dipak Misra, Amitava Roy

Print Page

Whether proceeding under DV Act can be initiated against lady with whom husband is having extra marital relation?

 The short submission of Shri Patil, learned counsel,
is in Domestic Violence case as also in Criminal Complaint
Case, the complainant – non­applicant No. 2 has joined her

husband, his parents as party respondents.  Along with them,
the present applicants who are not relatives of husband have
also been impleaded.   He points out that as per allegations,
applicant No. 4 is alleged to be having extra marital relations
with her husband and applicant Nos. 1 & 2 are her parents.
Applicant No. 3 is her married sister while applicant No. 4 is
her   married   brother.     He   also   states   that   non­applicant
nowhere pleads that her husband has been staying with the
applicants and she has been staying with her husband as a part
of their family.
The provisions of Section 498­A of Indian Penal

Code   as   also   the   provisions   of   Protection   of   Women   from
Domestic Violence Act, 2005, contemplate action against the
husband and his relatives.  It is obvious that the applicants do
not fall in that category.
8. In this situation, cognizance of Domestic Violence
Case No. 254 of 2014 or then Criminal Complaint Case No.
120 of 2015 and FIR registered vide Crime No. 125 of 2015 as
against the applicants is unsustainable.  Therefore, we quash
and set aside the cognizance already taken to that extent.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO.  712  OF  2015
 Maroti s/o Domaji Ramteke,

V
 State of Maharashtra

         CORAM :  B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
       FEBRUARY  15, 2016.
Citation:2016 ALLMR(CRI) 4232

Print Page

When Husband's extramarital relationship will not amount to cruelty for the purpose of S 498A of IPC?

Coming to the facts of the present case, it is seen that the factum of divorce has not been believed by the learned trial Judge and the High Court. But the fact remains is that the husband and the wife had started living separately in the same house and the deceased had told her sister that there was severance of status and she would be going to her parental home after the 'Holi' festival. True it is, there is some evidence about the illicit relationship and even if the same is proven, we are of the considered opinion that cruelty, as envisaged under the first limb of Section 498A IPC would not get attracted. It would be difficult to hold that the mental cruelty was of such a degree that it would drive the wife to commit suicide. Mere extra-marital relationship, even if proved, would be illegal and immoral, as has been said in Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal (supra), but it would take a different character if the prosecution brings some evidence on record to show that the accused had conducted in such a manner to drive the wife to commit suicide. In the instant case, the accused may have been involved in an illicit relationship with the appellant no.4, but in the absence of some other acceptable evidence on record that can establish such high degree of mental cruelty, the Explanation to Section 498A which includes cruelty to drive a woman to commit suicide, would not be attracted.

Supreme Court of India

Ghusabhai Raisangbhai Chorasiya ... vs State Of Gujarat on 18 February, 2015

Bench: Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, Dipak Misra
Citation;2015 ALLMR(CRI)1188 SC

Print Page

Wife suspecting that husband is having an extramarital affair whether amounts to cruelty?

The Bombay High Court has ruled that regularly coming home late without informing the wife amounts to cruelty.

“Such type of conduct on the part of the husband… amounts to cruelty to the wife,” observed a division Bench comprising Justice P.B. Majmudar and Justice R.V. More.

It is expected that the husband “at least inform the wife on telephone” so that she won’t wait for him, the high court added while delivering the judgment on Thursday.

Pune-based Deeplakshmi had filed a petition challenging the Pune family court’s May 29 order, which had dissolved her marriage acting on her husband Sachin Zingade’s petition. 

Zingade had accused his wife of picking up quarrels with him, suspecting him of having an extramarital affair and insulting his parents and friends whenever they visited his home.

The family court had accepted his contention on the point of suspicion and termed it as cruelty.

The high court, however, clarified that the spouses are entitled to point out their legitimate grievances against each
other.

“If the circumstances so warrant, the wife may have some suspicion about the act and behaviour of her husband,” observed the high court.

Print Page