In-Laws’ Restrictions on Daughter-in-Law Not Considered Cruelty

The Bombay High Court recently ruled that restrictions placed on a daughter-in-law, such as not allowing her to watch television, instructing her to sleep on a carpet, and preventing her from meeting neighbors, do not constitute cruelty under Indian law. The court set aside the lower court's sentences against the husband and his family members in this case from Maharashtra.

The case involved a woman who had left her husband due to alleged mistreatment by her in-laws and later took her life in May 2002. Her family accused her in-laws of harassment, citing restrictions on watching TV, visiting a temple, meeting neighbors, and being made to fetch water early in the morning. The trial court had sentenced the husband and his family members to jail.

However, the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court, led by Justice Abhay S. Waghwase, reviewed the appeal and concluded that these actions, though restrictive, did not amount to "cruelty" as defined under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The court noted that there was no evidence of significant verbal or written communication between the woman and her in-laws in the two months before her death, which would suggest that the in-laws' behavior directly led to her tragic decision.

Based on this lack of evidence and the interpretation that the restrictions did not meet the threshold for cruelty under the law, the High Court overturned the lower court’s verdict, acquitting the husband and his family.